看看bokeh

刚这张还是有些广角变形，PS了一下。

还有一些关于20－50 f4 ai/ais信息：
http://photo_net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000kXI&topic_id=23&topic=photo_net

其中：　Bjorn Rorslett , Jan 24, 2000; 05:14 p.m.

as many people by now have discovered, the 25-50 f/4 Nikkor is a true optical gem. it has a degree of colour vividness that only is matched or surpassed by the recent and hugely expensive AFS Nikkor 17-35/2.8 and AFS 28-70/2.8. there is very little colour fringing in this lens and it has remarkably good image rendition when stopped well down, a feat that very few modern zooms can match.

the design of the 25-50 makes it low in flare and ghosting. however, this is contingent upon two factors; viz. the internal glass surfaces must be clean, and the front and rear elements must be kept immaculately clean.

until the arrival of the two AFS Nikkors mentioned above, the 25-50/4 was one of my favourite Nikkor lenses and my preferred choice for landscape photography. I still use it on my F2 Titan, but no longer on either F5 or D1.

Read about the 25-50 and 100+ other Nikkors at http://www_foto_no/nikon/ (select 'Lens Evaluations' from the menu bar). Please use this portal into the site, or, alternatively, http://www_foto_no/nikon/index2.html,as there is a lot of browser compatitiblity and platform issues that are carried out when the start page is executed. I see that several sites link directly to underlying pages and that could cause troubles with some browsers.

Bjxrn Rxrslett (Bjorn Rorslett)

第二个老兄在2007年7月说：

Review 3 of 10

Price Paid:  $200.00 from Private sale

Summary:

Paid $AUD200 for this 16 years ago. I have used this lens for night photography on a cable released Nikon loaded with transparency on a tripod as well as for daytime photos handheld and on tripod.

Compared to my other Canon, Nikon and Leica lenses this lens produces brilliantly crisp and beautifully coloured photos that jump up at the eye.

I mentioned to someone knowledgable the extraordinary colour on a par with my Leica R 180 f3.4 Apo and someone suggested that extraordinary colour is a good indicator that this lens must be Apo corrected.

I don't know how the quality was achieved but I will not be parted form this lens.

I am now debating which Nikon digital to buy to allow me to keep using it or if I should go Canon to keep using Leica. I will have to test the latest digital bodies to make that decision.

Strengths:

Easy coverage of popular range of indoor and landscape lens ranges.

Fantastic crisp and rich rendition of colour into light at night and during daytime.

The proof of the pudding is in the photos with subjects which leap off the print or slide.

Weaknesses:

Loose focusing collar but this makes no difference to photos

Similar Products Used:

Nikon AIS 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, 300 f4
Canon FD 20mm f2.8, 24mm f2.8, 35mm f2, 50mm f1.4, 100 f4 macro
Leica R 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4, 90mm f2, 180mm Apo f3.4

Customer Service:

Never required

他甚至把这个头的色彩与Leia R apo 180/3.4相提并论。

上面这两张都没有PS，直接JGP，机内VIVID模式出片。但感到焦外的色调呈现蓝色。用的是镜头20-50 f4 ais，查了一些资料，这个镜头用的人很少，但用的人都说她太棒了。

再来一张

http://www_leitax_com/

这个网站在卖leica-nikon F mount的镜头底座，只是价格格太贵了，一个要75EURO，盼望国内会么时侯有人仿制，价格在300CNY以内就好了。个人觉得这种底座比国内现在的一些改口的方法好象要好一些，因为这种“改口”应该是可逆的。
不过，网上也有人说接环的玩法不怎么样，还是要拍胶片。自己用那个R4S和R50拍出的PP确实感觉太棒了。
但心里总是想折腾不是么？自己还是想看看把这个R50接到数码上到底是什么效果，期待中。。。。。

For example, when a 90mm lens is mounted on a Leica, the viewfinder magnification remains the same as when a 28mm lens is mounted. The picture area of the 28 mm lens is virtually the entire viewfinder. The picture area of the 90 mm lens is a small rectangular frame in the middle of the viewfinder. The Leica shows the picture area by projecting white lines in the viewfinder. These lines(called bright line frames) form frames that show the picture areas for 28,35,50,75,90 and 135 mm lenses. The frames change depending on lens mounted.
例如，当将一个90mm的镜头安在M6上时，其取景器的放大倍率与用28mm镜头的放大倍率是一样的，28mm镜头所拍摄的图像正好是取景器窗口看到的全部面积，但90mm的镜头实际拍摄的图像却只是位于取景器看到的图像的※※一个小的矩形区域。M6在取景器的屏幕上通过显示白线来显示被拍照片的实际图像区域，这些线(被称作白线框)所包围的画面为28,35,50,75,90,135mm这些不同焦距镜头的实际拍摄画面，它们会根据安装在相机上镜头的不同而变化。

For a normal (45 or 50 mm) lens, the Leica has an advantage. The view finder is brighter in the M6. Additionally, since the 50 mm frame does not fill the entire viewfinder, the photographer can also see the area beyond the picture area. This assists in composition. On the other hand, with a 90 mm lens mounted, the frame area on an M6 is pretty small, making it difficult to see what is there. With the G2, the picture area for the 90 mm lens is magnified, making it much easier to see the subject. This also makes critical focusing more difficult. For a 135 mm lens the problems is even more difficult. Of course a G2 does not even have a 135 lens.
在使用标准镜头时，Leica有优势：取景器比G2亮；此外，虽然50mm的画幅没有充满整个取景屏，但摄影者能够看到被摄对象区域以外的画面，这可以帮助 构图。在另一方面，当用90mm镜头时，M6的取景区域太小了，很难看清被摄对象；而用G2时，90mm镜头的被摄图像区域被放大，可以比较容易看清目标，M6在这方面也使得挑剔的对焦非常困难。对135mm镜头来讲，这个问题更加突出，当然，G2没有135mm的镜头。

Focusing is another issue of difference. There is a fundamental difference between the G2's autofocus system and the Leica's pure manual rangefinder system. The G2 is also a rangefinder, but there is not coincident image system as in the M6. The G2 can be focused manually, but this manual focusing is electonic manual focusing- not machanical. There is no way for a G2 photographer to tell if somethins is in focus except to rely on the distance readout in the viewfinder on the top of the camera. The G2 lenses do not even have focus rangs. The Leica coincident rangefinder system is a joy to use for normal and wide angle lenses. It is easy to see and is certain -provided it is properly aligned.

对焦是另一个不同的地方。G2的自动对焦系统与M6的纯手动旁轴对焦有根本的不同。G2也是旁轴，但与M6的图像系统却不一致。G2也可以进行手动对焦，但它的手动对焦是电子手动对焦而不是机械的，此时，G2的摄影师除了依靠通过相机顶部的取景器上显示的距离读数外是无法判断被摄对象是否合焦的，G2的镜头甚至连对焦环都没有。Leicar的这套相似的旁轴系统在使用广角镜头和标准镜头时是令人愉悦的，在正确地调焦后它非常容易看清并且对焦非常容易非常坚决。

This brings us to focusing accuracy. No one complains about the focusing accuracy of normal or wide angle lenses with either the G2 or the M6. They both focus accurately-better than any SLR. But let us look at the focusing accuracy with a 90 mm lens. Both the M6 and G2 have questions on their records here. There have been many questions regarding the focusing accuracy of the G cameras. Indeed, when the G2 was introduced, it was said to have overcome the sometimes poor 90 mm focusing ability of the G1. Contax has recognized this problem and addressed it. By all reports, the G2 does do better in this regard than the G1, and many photographers report that it is excellent in this regard. However, there have been some comments of focusing inaccuracy with the G2 and the 90 mm lens. After looking into this, there seem to be two reasons. The first, which may be the most commen, is that some new G2 photographers are not used to using AF. Simply, the do no realize that the AF sensor area marked on the viewfinder is what the camera will focus on. The G2 does not use a wide area AF- it uses a very narrow AF area. The second reason is misalignment of the AF system in the camera. There seem to be two kinds of misalignment: 1) the AF sensor not being aligned with the AF senor area indicated in the viewfinder, and ; 2) misalignment of the distance adjustment for the AF sensor. I must say, however, that I have never experienced any focusing problem in any of my three G2's.
上述这些问题引导我们到了对焦精度的话题上。没有人抱怨过G2或者M6在使用广角或标准镜头时的对焦精度，它们都对焦精准--比任何的单反相机都好。但是让我们看看90mm镜头的对焦精度，G2和M6在这里都有不良的记录。Contax G型相机发生过许多对焦精度的问题。确实，Contax已经意识到了这个问题并在G2开始推出的时侯就公开宣称已经克服了在G1上有时侯会发生的可怜的90mm的对焦能力。所有的报道都说G2在这方面比G1好，而且很多摄影师说在这方面G2非常优秀。然而，有一些关于90mm镜头在G2上的对焦精度的一些评论，仔细研究这些评论后发现，一般有两种情况导致对焦不准：第一种情况，也许是最普通的问题，是一些G2的新手不习惯于使用自动对焦，他们甚至还不知道在取景器上显示的自动对焦区域就是相机要对焦的地方。G2没有使用一个宽区域自动对焦，而是使用一个非常窄的自动对焦区域。第二个情况是对相机的自动自焦调整方法不对，好象有两种情况：一、自动对焦感应器没有调整得与在取景窗口上的对焦感应区域一致；二、自动对焦感应调整距离错误(注：这两点我没怎么理解透，不知怎么译清楚，回头再研究一下)。我必须说，我在我的三台G2上从未经历过对焦不准的问题。

How about the M6 focusing accuracy? Like the G2, the M6 must be properly aligned. Here the alignment is in the very complex but generally very reliable mechanical rengefinder system and lens coupling system. When properly aligned, the M6's focusing accuracy is good enough to allow use of a 90 mm f2 lens and is good enough for use of a 135 mm lens at f5.6. Note, however, that even theoretically, the focusing ability of the rangefinder is actually not quite good enough for a 135 mm lens at f4. Moreover, the focusing ability of the M6 depends on the photographer having very good eyesight in order to see the small picture frame areas for the 90 mm and 135 mm lens. In my opinion, both the G2 and the M6 are fine for 90 mm lens.
而M6的对焦精度又如何呢？就象G2一样，M6也必须被正确地调焦。这时，对焦调整是在一个非常复杂但是通常情况下都非常可靠的机械旁轴系统及其镜头联接系统下进行的。在正确调焦的前提下，M6的对焦精度足以使用90mm f2的镜头，并足以在f5.6的光圈下使用135mm的镜头。请记住，就算是在理论上，旁轴相机的对焦能力实际上在135mm f4.0下都无法保证能精确对焦。而且，M6的对焦能力还要依赖摄影者有非常好的视力以便于能看清90mm和135mm镜头的很小的对焦区域。我认为，G2和M6在90mm镜头上的对焦能力都足够好。

The issue of simplicity v. features is very personal. But there are some other issues to address. The first is shutter accuracy. The G2 beats the pants off the M6. The M6's cloth horizontal mechanical focal plane shutter is not nearly as accurate as the often be off by 1/3 to 1/2 stop or more. A well aligned M6 shutter can be within 1/3 stop. One must also remenber the M6's limit of 1/1000 shutter speed and flash synch speed of 1/50.These can both be significant limitations. However, it must also be remembered that the M6 shutter functions without a battery, The G2 depends on its two CR2 batteries for its life.
关于简洁与新特征的较量有非常强的个人倾向。但是有一些其它的事项需要说明：第一是关于快门精度，在这一点上G2完胜M6。M6的布质的水平机械焦平面快门远不好G2的垂直金属电子焦平面快门精确。M6的快门会经常有1/3档到1/2的误差或者更多，一个经精心调校的M6可将误差控制在1/3档范围内。而且大家还不要忘记M6的1/1000秒快门速度和1/50秒闪光同步速度的限制。这些限制也可以算是M6的软肋。然而，另一方面，又不得不说M6的快门不需要电池，而G2的快门要依靠两节CR2电池才能工作。

Lenses.There is probably not a hotter issue between the two cameras than this one. I must first say that I have not had as much time with the M6 system as the G2 system. So some of this information is based upon personal use and other sources. I'll start by giveing you my three conclusions:
关于镜头，在G2和M6之间再没有比这更热的话题了。我不得不先说我用M6的时间比用G2系统短。所以，一些这方面的观点是基于个人的使用感受和其它的信息来源。我先概括以下三个总结：

1. There is no overall objective difference (family look) between the two lens families.
1. 在二者的镜头群之间在客观上没有全面的不同。

2. While there are fifferences between comparable lenses, there is no overall quality difference.
2. 在二者可比较的镜头之间的对比中，没有全面的质量区别。

3. These are all very fine lenses and any differences in quality can only be determined by careful testing. The use of a tripod (or not) makes a much larger difference in sharpness thant which lens is used.
3. 二者的镜头都是非常好的镜头，任何质量上的不同都是由精心调整的工作决定的。使用三角架(与否)在方面会有很大的区别，这一点比用什么镜头产生的区别更大。

There is no objective family look - at least I cannot see one. Some Leica users, and to a lesser degree some Contax users, talk about a certain family look to their lenses. Photos takes with very good lenses can be differentialed from photos taken with fair quality lenses. But this depends on the quality of the lens - not the manufacturer. Cannon, Nikon,etc all make some very high quality lenses. Photos from these lenses will all look good. However, I have never read or heared anyone who has been able to define a family "look" into any objective or scientific terms. Instead, they use vague, descriptive terms like feel, ambiance, rouded, clarity, impact etc... Moreover, if there is truly a "look", it should be verifiable by an objective blind (so to speak) comparison test. I have never heard of one being done by an objective and disinterested person.
无法从客观上判断一个镜头群的好玩--至少我无法看到。一些Leica的用户和范围小一些的Contax用户在谈论着关于对他们的整个镜头群的确切的看法。我认为，用非常好的镜头和用比较好的镜头照的照片通过细心的辨别能看出区别来，但这是由镜头的质量决定的，而并不是由生产商来决定。佳能，尼康都能生产非常高质量的镜头，用这些镜头拍的作品看上去都非常棒。然而，我从来没看到过或没有听到过任何人能够对一整个镜头群下任何客观和科学上的评论。相反，他们总是用含糊的、描述性质的诸如感觉、氛围、大概、透明、效果等词(注：这一堆词完全是瞎翻的)。此外，假如真的存在总体的看法，这也应该通过一种客观的盲测(这样才能理直气壮地说)为基础。我从来没有听到过有一个客观的无私的人做过这样的事。

For a start, it should be noted that there is a fra larger selection fo lenses for the M6 than the G2. There are only g G2 lenses. The G2 has no lens faster than 2.0. Leica has about 13 lenses with speeds up to f1.0. A few comparisons(my own opinion): The new Leica 21/2.8 aspherical and the G 21/2.8 are equal.The Leica 35/2.0 aspherical is much better than the G 35 lens. The G 45/2.0 is slightly better than the leica 50/2.0. The G 90/2.8 is slightly better than the Leica 90/2.8. All the Leica lenses are better built than the G lenses. They are more solid. The finish quality of the G and M6 lenses are equal(as opposed to the bodies, where the M cameras are much better finished than the G2'S)
首先，我必须说M6的镜头可选择的范围要比G2大得多，G2只有6支镜头，G2没有快过2.0光圈的镜头。而Leica有大约13支镜头，镜头速度可达f1.0.以我个人的观点，一些比较如下：新版的leica21/2.8 aspherical(非球面镜)与G21/2.8相当，Leica 35/2.0 aspherical比G的35 mm要好很多，而G 45/2.0比Leica 50/2.0稍好，G的90/2.8也 Leica的90/2.8稍好。所有Leica镜头的做工都比G系列镜头好，它们更加坚固；G和M6镜头的外观质量相当(这一点与机身的区别相反)。

For example, when a 90mm lens is mounted on a Leica, the viewfinder magnification remains the same as when a 28mm lens is mounted. The picture area of the 28 mm lens is virtually the entire viewfinder. The picture area of the 90 mm lens is a small rectangular frame in the middle of the viewfinder. The Leica shows the picture area by projecting white lines in the viewfinder. These lines(called bright line frames) form frames that show the picture areas for 28,35,50,75,90 and 135 mm lenses. The frames change depending on lens mounted.
例如，当将一个90mm的镜头安在M6上时，其取景器的放大倍率与用28mm镜头的放大倍率是一样的，28mm镜头所拍摄的图像正好是取景器窗口看到的全部面积，但90mm的镜头实际拍摄的图像却只是位于取景器看到的图像的※※一个小的矩形区域。M6在取景器的屏幕上通过显示白线来显示被拍照片的实际图像区域，这些线(被称作白线框)所包围的画面为28,35,50,75,90,135mm这些不同焦距镜头的实际拍摄画面，它们会根据安装在相机上镜头的不同而变化。

For a normal (45 or 50 mm) lens, the Leica has an advantage. The view finder is brighter in the M6. Additionally, since the 50 mm frame does not fill the entire viewfinder, the photographer can also see the area beyond the picture area. This assists in composition. On the other hand, with a 90 mm lens mounted, the frame area on an M6 is pretty small, making it difficult to see what is there. With the G2, the picture area for the 90 mm lens is magnified, making it much easier to see the subject. This also makes critical focusing more difficult. For a 135 mm lens the problems is even more difficult. Of course a G2 does not even have a 135 lens.
在使用标准镜头时，Leica有优势：取景器比G2亮；此外，虽然50mm的画幅没有充满整个取景屏，但摄影者能够看到被摄对象区域以外的画面，这可以帮助 构图。在另一方面，当用90mm镜头时，M6的取景区域太小了，很难看清被摄对象；而用G2时，90mm镜头的被摄图像区域被放大，可以比较容易看清目标，M6在这方面也使得挑剔的对焦非常困难。对135mm镜头来讲，这个问题更加突出，当然，G2没有135mm的镜头。

Focusing is another issue of difference. There is a fundamental difference between the G2's autofocus system and the Leica's pure manual rangefinder system. The G2 is also a rangefinder, but there is not coincident image system as in the M6. The G2 can be focused manually, but this manual focusing is electonic manual focusing- not machanical. There is no way for a G2 photographer to tell if somethins is in focus except to rely on the distance readout in the viewfinder on the top of the camera. The G2 lenses do not even have focus rangs. The Leica coincident rangefinder system is a joy to use for normal and wide angle lenses. It is easy to see and is certain -provided it is properly aligned.

对焦是另一个不同的地方。G2的自动对焦系统与M6的纯手动旁轴对焦有根本的不同。G2也是旁轴，但与M6的图像系统却不一致。G2也可以进行手动对焦，但它的手动对焦是电子手动对焦而不是机械的，此时，G2的摄影师除了依靠通过相机顶部的取景器上显示的距离读数外是无法判断被摄对象是否合焦的，G2的镜头甚至连对焦环都没有。Leicar的这套相似的旁轴系统在使用广角镜头和标准镜头时是令人愉悦的，在正确地调焦后它非常容易看清并且对焦非常容易非常坚决。

This brings us to focusing accuracy. No one complains about the focusing accuracy of normal or wide angle lenses with either the G2 or the M6. They both focus accurately-better than any SLR. But let us look at the focusing accuracy with a 90 mm lens. Both the M6 and G2 have questions on their records here. There have been many questions regarding the focusing accuracy of the G cameras. Indeed, when the G2 was introduced, it was said to have overcome the sometimes poor 90 mm focusing ability of the G1. Contax has recognized this problem and addressed it. By all reports, the G2 does do better in this regard than the G1, and many photographers report that it is excellent in this regard. However, there have been some comments of focusing inaccuracy with the G2 and the 90 mm lens. After looking into this, there seem to be two reasons. The first, which may be the most commen, is that some new G2 photographers are not used to using AF. Simply, the do no realize that the AF sensor area marked on the viewfinder is what the camera will focus on. The G2 does not use a wide area AF- it uses a very narrow AF area. The second reason is misalignment of the AF system in the camera. There seem to be two kinds of misalignment: 1) the AF sensor not being aligned with the AF senor area indicated in the viewfinder, and ; 2) misalignment of the distance adjustment for the AF sensor. I must say, however, that I have never experienced any focusing problem in any of my three G2's.
上述这些问题引导我们到了对焦精度的话题上。没有人抱怨过G2或者M6在使用广角或标准镜头时的对焦精度，它们都对焦精准--比任何的单反相机都好。但是让我们看看90mm镜头的对焦精度，G2和M6在这里都有不良的记录。Contax G型相机发生过许多对焦精度的问题。确实，Contax已经意识到了这个问题并在G2开始推出的时侯就公开宣称已经克服了在G1上有时侯会发生的可怜的90mm的对焦能力。所有的报道都说G2在这方面比G1好，而且很多摄影师说在这方面G2非常优秀。然而，有一些关于90mm镜头在G2上的对焦精度的一些评论，仔细研究这些评论后发现，一般有两种情况导致对焦不准：第一种情况，也许是最普通的问题，是一些G2的新手不习惯于使用自动对焦，他们甚至还不知道在取景器上显示的自动对焦区域就是相机要对焦的地方。G2没有使用一个宽区域自动对焦，而是使用一个非常窄的自动对焦区域。第二个情况是对相机的自动自焦调整方法不对，好象有两种情况：一、自动对焦感应器没有调整得与在取景窗口上的对焦感应区域一致；二、自动对焦感应调整距离错误(注：这两点我没怎么理解透，不知怎么译清楚，回头再研究一下)。我必须说，我在我的三台G2上从未经历过对焦不准的问题。

How about the M6 focusing accuracy? Like the G2, the M6 must be properly aligned. Here the alignment is in the very complex but generally very reliable mechanical rengefinder system and lens coupling system. When properly aligned, the M6's focusing accuracy is good enough to allow use of a 90 mm f2 lens and is good enough for use of a 135 mm lens at f5.6. Note, however, that even theoretically, the focusing ability of the rangefinder is actually not quite good enough for a 135 mm lens at f4. Moreover, the focusing ability of the M6 depends on the photographer having very good eyesight in order to see the small picture frame areas for the 90 mm and 135 mm lens. In my opinion, both the G2 and the M6 are fine for 90 mm lens.
而M6的对焦精度又如何呢？就象G2一样，M6也必须被正确地调焦。这时，对焦调整是在一个非常复杂但是通常情况下都非常可靠的机械旁轴系统及其镜头联接系统下进行的。在正确调焦的前提下，M6的对焦精度足以使用90mm f2的镜头，并足以在f5.6的光圈下使用135mm的镜头。请记住，就算是在理论上，旁轴相机的对焦能力实际上在135mm f4.0下都无法保证能精确对焦。而且，M6的对焦能力还要依赖摄影者有非常好的视力以便于能看清90mm和135mm镜头的很小的对焦区域。我认为，G2和M6在90mm镜头上的对焦能力都足够好。

The issue of simplicity v. features is very personal. But there are some other issues to address. The first is shutter accuracy. The G2 beats the pants off the M6. The M6's cloth horizontal mechanical focal plane shutter is not nearly as accurate as the often be off by 1/3 to 1/2 stop or more. A well aligned M6 shutter can be within 1/3 stop. One must also remenber the M6's limit of 1/1000 shutter speed and flash synch speed of 1/50.These can both be significant limitations. However, it must also be remembered that the M6 shutter functions without a battery, The G2 depends on its two CR2 batteries for its life.

前几天翻译的G2一文，辛苦了半天结果也没给字数，觉得可能是因为当时是在Word里编辑完了后直接粘贴的缘故，因此准备再老老实实地敲进来，这不能算混呵。因为当天在翻译这篇文章时为了学英语，连大半部分英文都没有从网上直接粘贴，是自己照着打的，以加深印象。好了，再学一遍。

Contax G2, from photo_net, by Tom Shea, created in 1998
link: http://photo_net/equipment/contax/g2

I will devote the first part of this review to considering the Contax G2 AF rangefinder system on its own merits. Then, I will take the more dangerous path and will compare it to Leica and SLR system.
我将首先实事求是是回顾一下Contax G2自动旁轴照相机系统的特点。然后，我将冒险地拿它与Leica和单反相机系统进行比较。

Dimensions　外观

The G2 is a solid camera. It is 139 mm wide, 80 mm high and 45 mm deep. It weight 650 grams without batteries. It feels rather heavy and controls are smooth and firm. It is a well built camera. The finish is excellent-upsurpassed in my experience. The lenses use a breech mount system and are a little fussy to mount.
G2是一台坚固的相机。它宽139mm,高80mm,深45mm。不包括电池重650克。拿在手上感觉非常重，机身控制钮都非常顺滑和坚实。它是一台做工非常棒的相机，外观是我所经历过的最优秀的。镜头使用一种底衬系统与机身联接，安装时有一点麻烦。

Lens options　镜头选择

Contax produce 16/8,21/8, 28/2.8,35/2.0,45/2.0,90/2.8 for G2.With an adapter, the camera can accept Contax/Yashica mount SLR lenses.
Contax 为G2提供16/8、21/2.8、28/2.8、35/2、45/2以及90/2.8共六支镜头。它还可通过一个转接器使用Contax或Yashica接口的单反镜头。

NO.290

NO.288