Back to film - Ikon full kit or used M6(ttl) with ??

It's been a long time since I posted here... too long.

 

The biggest mistake I've made the past 5 years was selling ALL of my M gear -

all bought new too..

 

Now, after spending the past week evenings looking at my slides from my M days,

I realize that I simply need to come back to a rangefinder with film. I shoot

travel nearly 85% of the time and 50% of that time is indoor shooting.

 

The thing is, since I last bought Leica c 4 years ago, the prices have shot up

far to much for me (new).

 

I am quite certain that my finances will allow me one chunk on gear now - and no

more for at least another year or more.

 

So, admitting that I loved the feel and satisfaction of my M6ttl with 3 'crons

and the TeleApo... and admitting that I am unable to see or feel an Ikon and

matching lenses before purchasing...

 

 

The satisfaction of having a full kit NOW with the Ikon and ZM 21/2.8, 35/2,

50/2 and a Lanthar 90 is immense.

 

The lack of doubt having a mint M6 w or w/o ttl and a 35 'cron and TeleApo 135

or a Summarit 90 has rewards too.

 

What should I consider when deciding between these two?

 

Frankly, and this after spending many nights at the "bar" with a camera seller

twice my age and experience, and another pro advertising/art photographer, the

technology in almost all modern lenses is so high that really it is just

splitting hairs and taste - I wouldn't consider buying any new Leica gear (save

the Summarits or maybe the 24 Elmarit) because the perceived value is just too

poor in my eyes.

How about mixing and mating? M6 and some Zeiss and Leica lenses? The ZI is a nice camera

but I consider it a sidekick to the more battle-worthy Leica M6.

Haven't used a ZI myself, so I can't comment on the body. But Don Dudenbostel, a long time pro, has both M's and ZI and has posted enthusiastically <a href=http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00L4vx>about the ZI camera</a> and the Zeiss lenses -- the 35/2 in particular as I recall.<P>

 

If I were now buying rf film gear, and considering the ZI and Zeiss lenses, I'd find Don's comments reassuring.<p>

 

Still tough to buy w/out actually handling the gear, isn't it ?

M6 classic, Zeiss, Leica glass. Ikon RF is to Leica M6 what Toyota is to Range Rover.

<< ... <i>Ikon RF is to Leica M6 what Toyota is to Range Rover.</i>... >> <p>

 

Hard to know which way to take that, Paul.<p>

 

Range Rover is dressier, snazzier, better equipped in theory. But the Toyota stubbornly keeps on going, while the RR hasn't enjoyed the greatest reputation for reliability.<p>

 

Perhaps that's what you meant to say ? :)

Back to the original question, I see there's a <a href=http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=55>discussion forum here</a> with quite a few ZI users evidently active. <p>

 

[Note: The RFF site has been down and is just now getting going again. Might be a tad slow.]

The Ikon is supposed to be a nice camera with a very good finder but you'll be able to get

the Leica fixed forever. Considering the example of the Konica Hexar, a camera newly

introduced (relatively) that is now discontinued and very hard to get fixed, then who knows

how long the Ikon will be around or whether parts will be available into the future.

Personally, I don't like AE, prefering instead a simple needle or M6 style metering

system...so I'm not much interested in the Ikon.

Unfortunately, the other thing to go since you were involved, is Kodachrome. Not just the film (K64 is still made) but for all practical purposes getting it processed is APITA, and the quality ain't there either.<P>For better or for worse, it's cheaper (and better?) to buy a 50" TV and go digital. (IMO film is still better for B&W, but just barely.)

R Fred, some sort of mix is a reasonable solution. I would love to have some of those Zeiss lenses, but the cost of most of them new is already at the upper end of what I am ever willing to spend, and there are many Leica used lens options including some of the best for just a bit more than Zeiss new. Unless you are convinced that the Zeiss lenses are every bit the equal of the Leicas in build quality and image quality, then I would anchor the system with a few of the Leica favorites and then go from there.

 

For example, I've heard many great things about the Zeiss planar 50 f2, but I paid $850 for an immaculate Leica current 50 cron instead of $650 for the Zeiss new, and I have no regrets. I for one love the built in hood on the cron which makes the lens very compact: much smaller than the Zeiss with a hood. Similarly, I paid about $1200 for an awesome 35 cron asph with the hood (before ZM was introduced), but I have been so pleased with that lens in particular that I have no regrets compared to the $850 cost of the Zeiss ZM 35 f2. However, if the Zeiss 21 and 25 2.8 go for about $1100, that seems like an incredible value, and if I was stuck on these focal lengths, I would buy them over the Leicas, which are more expensive than that used for the current models. I have a 90 elmar-c for $270 and no regrets, but your choice of the 90 lanthar is very reasonable.

 

Finally, you can get a really good M6 classic used for the B&H price of $1340 for a new Ikon. If you want aperture priority, which I admit is nice, then o.k., but if today, knowing that a used M6 is worth about the same price as the new Ikon, I had the choice, I would still take the M6. Who needs TTL flash with the advanced auto mode of modern flashes in the wide and slight portrait focal lengths? I use a Nikon SB30 and SB80dx on my M6 with great results.

I picked up an Ikon at Central Camera in Chicago. It felt light and borderline tinny. And I agree with what Pablito said. I don't really like AE much, either. Oh-- that doesn't mean you shouldn't like it! But for the price of a new AE, you can get a very nice used M6. And then maybe consider some Zeiss lenses, if you want; or some used Leica ones. I think it's the right thing to do.

Get an M6. You know the camera, and if you eventually handle the Ikon and like it better you can always peddle the M6 with a good shot at getting out of it what you paid. It's uncertain whether you could do the same with the Ikon if roles were reversed. As for lenses you can buy now what you can afford and then upgrade later. if you're buying used lenses they too would likely sell for what you paid if you wish to trade up.

Congratulations on your epiphany, on several forms there are posts stating that people are going back to film for various reasons.

 

If you don't buy an M6 now, you'll still always want one and it'll happen someday, so you might as well find a pretty one now.

 

That said, if you're looking for good users, check out the R2s, R3s and R4s in the Voigtlander line. At the very least excellent backups to the Leica, and it doesn't cost you $100 every time it gets scratched.

The Zeiss Ikon compares more with the M7 than the M6 because of the AE.

The Zeiss uses the same basic metals that are used in the M8 its a little lighter but plenty strong enough you will notice after a day with it around your neck that you have less neck fatigue. The VF is at least as good maybe better. The flash sync is 125 sec. faster than the M cameras. The film loading is open back style not via the bottom. You will pay about $1200 for a new one vs. $3000 for an M7 an M6 is not available new and a mint one will still run about as much as a Zeiss and then you might need to upgrade the rangefinder to prevent white out of the finder, the conversion will cost you money.

 

The new Zeiss is best wearing in silver since wear thru still shows silver vs. black which show wear easier. Zeiss is a big company, its ties with Sony, making lenses for Sony, ZM lenses in Leica M mount, for Nikon ZF F mount and Pentax ZK K mount show that Zeiss is still relevant accross brands as a third party provider of optics. Perhaps the demise of Contax brand has helped Zeiss to become a very sought after maker for those who want high end lenses that rival OEM lenses in quality. Zeiss still supplies lots of legacy lenses for Hasselblad and Rollei users and its Contax base.

 

I think its safe to say that Zeiss will be around to repair the rangefinder cameras for a long time, they have a lot of irons in the fire.

I've got the ZM 21/4.5 on my shopping list. At 190 grams against the 300 of the f2.8, cheaper, and virtually zero distortion, I find it a more attractive buy. Backed up with some personal trustworthy recommendations, it will be used on the M3 with of course the appropriate finder. As a second body, I'm also considering the

Zeiss Ikon SW Camera without rangefinder. Ideal as the wide angle lens body, it will also provide me with TTL metering with Visoflex and Reprovit copystand work, ... and again, its cheaper, smaller and lighter.

 

Cheers, Kevin.

kevin do you know how the ZI SW compares in size with the Voigtlander r4a? The SW will have one advantage no VF blockage by large lenses of the frame.

Great advice so far - thanks.

 

I'll admit that I really haven't considered mixing and matching bodies and lenses - I don't know why. I'll add the VC 15 to either body though... eventually.

 

As a tool, either will fulfill my needs perfectly fine - albeit the Ikon and full set of lenses is essentially complete - I do not want to find that somewhere my head will say "it's not up to snuff" compared to the Leica in quality and feel.

 

AE means nothing to me, and ttl on the M6 is just because that's what I had (and apparently the meter is a bit more sensivtive.)

I would suggest that you do what I didn't manage. Don't compromise on body or lenses. Save up, buy the best and just make do with a little less until you finally get exactly what you want.

 

Compromise in any way and you will never be satisfied.

How large do you print? If you print large, perhaps you should look at a Mamiya 7.

My I humbly suggest that go for the M6TTL and leica lenses b/c

 

1. You are already familiar with this system

2. After handling an Ikon, I dont think it comes close to an M6TTL. The M6TTL is a robust

camera and built like a tank

3. The resale value will hold better than the IKON etc..

 

Go on. You know you want to =0)

R Fred,

In the last year, I have bought 6 rf cameras, including Bessas, Leica M7, and Zeiss Ikons, as

well as 11 rf lenses, including Zeiss ZM, Leica ASPH and CV ASPH glass.

I have just posted my conclusions in the rf forum, however, there are 2 things I am certain

about:

1- Zeiss Ikon - if you need a camera for taking photographs, and not other pursuits, like

fondling, bragging or driving nails, is the best rf BY A WIDE MARGIN!

2- the Zeiss ZM lenses do all the Leica lenses can do, plus they do more: they have better

flare control, better bokeh and better image plasticity, or 3D effect, if you prefer.

 

All this, especially if you buy on the bay from Japan, costs 1/3rd of the current

"equivalent" Leica gear, so frankly, there's nothing to talk about, and if you want an

analogy from the car world, the Leica can be a Range Rover, but a model from early

sixties, while the ZI may be a Toyota, but from the latest car show...

 

My overall opinion about the current Leica M equipment, is that it is seldom markedly

better in any performance measure than other products, but it is always the worst in terms

of value for money performance.

 

Take a look at these flickr pages:

 

You will find lot's of shots with the equipment specifications included.

Marek, my post above about the ZI were compiled summary of what you and others said about it on the RF Forum. Your pictures posted are great, since you kicked the tires and let us see the results you saved many lots of money investigating these lenses and cameras ourselves, thanks for sharing the results its been helpful and interesting. HE

Wow, Marek, a post like that and you should have a cult following of your own.

 

It's easy to hear and repeat the Leica mantra, which I have done and do myself, but it is completely refreshing and inspiring to read a post like yours. It's doesn't make my decision any easier..... but more difficult in a good way!

I'd agree with Marek too.

 

I own an M6 TTL, but to be honest there's nothing about it that you can't get in the Ikon

for less money. And some of my favourite lenses are Zeiss. The M6 is a little heavier and

perhaps feels more solid, but many people have found the Ikon has a better viewfinder

and more convenient film loading, and no evidence of the quality control problems that

have occurred with the electronics in the Leica metering system. (Some M6s and a great

many M7s have had serious problems).

 

If you're not fixed on the Leica brand name then the Ikon represents better value for

money.

Great point from Robert, don't buy until you try a Mamiya 7II, an amazing system especially coupled with a Nikon 9000...

" do you know how the ZI SW compares in size with the Voigtlander r4a? The SW will have one advantage no VF blockage by large lenses of the frame."

 

No Harvey. I have not made this comparison, but it's food for thought.