And then there is the "Planar" version for both the 35 and 45
I'm looking to get the 35mm recommended by Douglas but if I could find a 45 for a good price
I may get it also, I just want to get the correct version
thanks
r.gil wrote:
The 45 that you are talking about is this one?
Contax Normal 45mm f/2.8 MM Zeiss Tessar T* in black
I could get if for about $350
Nope, that's not for the G system. You want the Contax G 45mm f2 Planar. KEH has a few of them right now for around $400.
As I mentioned, if you can deal with the 45mm length, I would go with the 45 over the 35, as it is a "better" lens. Once you get down to 35mm, the lens design becomes more difficult. The ZM f2 Biogon is supposed to be sharper than the Contax G, but it is larger and has a longer mfd, so it depends what you need.
The Contax G 35 is essentially identical to the Leica 35 Summicron IV (pre-asph,) but with Zeiss coatings. So, it isn't amazingly sharp, but I think it's still pretty good for its focal length. Judging by sebboh's tests, I think that I may have a slightly better copy...but I'm probably just being optimistic!
douglasf13 wrote:
The Contax G 35 is essentially identical to the Leica 35 Summicron IV (pre-asph,) but with Zeiss coatings. So, it isn't amazingly sharp, but I think it's still pretty good for its focal length. Judging by sebboh's tests, I think that I may have a slightly better copy...but I'm probably just being optimistic!
regarding my test, the contax g 35/2 improves noticeably a greater distances and the corners are only that bad in the extreme corner. even when it's not super sharp it still has some of that zeiss pop that makes it look sharp. the 45/2 is a much better lens except for being slightly larger though.
love that picture from the lodge, uhoh7!
I have won an auction for a minolta kit, that includes several good rokkors. among them is 21mm f2.8 and 85mm f1.7. Any comments as to their hidden talents? I kow Sebboh has a few minoltas!
