Zeiss Ikon at New York Photo Expo

[Allen Herbert]

How much is this Zeiss Masterpiece gonna cost?

 

Well, it's not a Zeiss masterpiece: Cold Fact. It's built by Cosina: Cold Fact. It has a Zeiss Badge, there. So, Cosina has built it better than the R's, maybe.

 

For those who like Zeiss glass it's wonderful! somehow i think they would be better off with a second hand G2. Better build? better price?

 

just a few thoughts.

[chip l.]

In regards to the Bessa and ZI build quality, as well as lens quality.

 

The Bessa/Cosina RF's are based on the Nikon FM10/Promaster PK 2500 SLR bodies.

These are affordable SLR cameras with a shutter cycle life of maybe 10k to 25K (have not

seen reports as to the MTF of the FM10 shutter). It is possible that Zeiss required a better

shutter mechanism for their camera body.

 

We are spoiled in some ways. If you look at the general market of camera prices, they have

remained constant. But the quality has been reduced to meet that market. Reminds me of

a few years ago I had a customer that came in with one of the first (and in some ways

better) AF P&S Nikon cameras. It was broken and in her mind not worth the cost of repair. I

showed her cameras in the same price point (since that was her frame of reference); and

she did not feel that those cameras had the same feel or "build quality" that she was used

to. I showed her a Leica C1 (I think), and she liked it till she heard the price. I told here

(and showed her on the web) that the inflation costs made the C1 comparable to what she

was used to.

 

The Bessa R series is more expensive (compared to the FM10 on which it based) in part to

the limited market. I will also make the assumption that the RF system is more expensive

to build. With the ZI, one can hope that Ziess demanded more from Cosina in terms of the

overall quality, for the long term durability. Though I do buy into the arguments that this

was "preproduction". Yes, there is fine tuning to be done; but the quality should be there.

The final warranty provided by Hasselblad and time will tell whether the price is worth it.

 

For companies like Cosina, Tamron, Tokina, and Sigma do sometimes build lenses for the

camera manufactures under license. This includes "entry level" lenses as well as "main

stream" lenses. Specialty lenses may or may not be made by the camera manufactures,

depending on their needs.

 

As to lenses. In some cases these lenses are just rebadged (like the 28-80 from Pentax/

Tamron from 4 to 5 years ago. In other cases they may have cosmetic differences as well

(unconfirmed, but the Nikon 70-300 shared too much in common with the Tamron 70

-300 at the time - optically. Then you have a situation of the camera manufactures

outsourcing some of their production in order to meet price points. Otherwise I would

think that we would see lens prices near or equal to Leica at every focal length point.

 

I speak from someone that has been through photography and gear since the 70's. The

80's changed the manufacturing process and photography too. The 80's gave root to the

Canon Sureshot AF camera. Since then, no one had to buy a RF or SLR camera in order to

get "great" pictures. It also had an impact on the price that people were willing to pay to

get "great" pictures. Add to that the recession that gave root to cameras like the Nikon EM.

and other "budget" cameras. In some ways I look upon the 80's photographically as I do

the auto industry in the post-911 world. To sell cars post-911 the manufactures were

"forced' to offer interest free financing. IMO, once you open a "low price" option; it is hard

to roll that back.

 

To that end I would hope that the ZI RF would be in the range of $750 to $1000

(depending on the "value adds" of warranty and such. Unless Ziess has improved the "life"

of the shutter and other components. As to lenses I hope they are in the range of $300 to

$500 for the more popular lenses. Though I think the days are gone to expect that these

new lenses will last like the Canon FD or Zuiko series for the OM series. We have become a

disposable society.

[bill_marshall1]

With all of this talk about build quality, I was moved to re-read the Zeiss literature. What are their goals for this camera? Nowhere is bullet proof build quality mentioned. I think they have left this task to Leica.

 

What is stressed over & over is exceptionally precise focusing, especially for extreme wide angles & close range. Hence, the longest effective baselength on the market, the brightest viewfinder on the market (their claim), reduced focal shift when changing apertures. & exceptional lenses with neutral color rendition (also their claim).

 

Can this camera achieve exceptionally sharp, crisp pictures? That is the standard by which it should be judged because it is their stated goal to be able to do this better than any other camera on the market. This cannot be judged by handling the camera at a photo expo. We won't know the answer until someone can start taking pictures with it.

[john_shaeffer1]

Chip L. said:

 

"I speak from someone that has been through photography and gear since the 70's. The 80's changed the manufacturing process and photography too. The 80's gave root to the Canon Sureshot AF camera. Since then, no one had to buy a RF or SLR camera in order to get "great" pictures. It also had an impact on the price that people were willing to pay to get "great" pictures. Add to that the recession that gave root to cameras like the Nikon EM. and other "budget" cameras. In some ways I look upon the 80's photographically as I do the auto industry in the post-911 world. To sell cars post-911 the manufactures were "forced' to offer interest free financing. IMO, once you open a "low price" option; it is hard to roll that back."

 

Truer words not spoken! I might add that the Olympus Pen F series moved us to a progression of smaller lighter SLRs like the OM series, Minolta X, Ricoh and pentax small K mount SLRs, etc.

 

Now maybe the Pen F has revitalized the digital world, too?

[albert knapp md]

i second Alan Chin's comments as I too went to the show and

handled the Zeiss-Ikon RF. The viewfinder is nice but it is

downhill from there. The lens build is umimpressive and, as the

salesman was demonstrating one of the lenses, the aperture

ring broke! He was embarrassed and said it was just a

prototype! Some prototype! I figure that this is a bad omen.

[manaboleh]

Prototypes are the 1st glimpse by the world of a particular product and it just don't make sense that its' OK to accept shortcomings on it for it is only a prototype. Sometimes I think manufacturers are really nuts to be issuing prototypes that are defective and of inferior quality and showing it to the world. I would think this is the most important 1st step for the manufacturer to display its work. It should for all intents and purposes be perfect. If a manufacturer is not able to produce a prototype which is normally in small quantity with quality I doubt that producing mass products will improve the situation for them. Unless of course if the prototype they are showing you is the one they will be selling you later when mass produced.

[tommy_baker]

Thanks for the recon Alan/Albert. Based on this information it just DOES NOT

give ANY buyer confidence.

 

Any manufacturer who cannot even get a prototype right from the get go, just

ISN'T 'getting it'. I mean a prototype falling apart in the hands of a potential

customer a launch? -- come on, that is laughable at best, and scandalous at

worst..

 

Next to glass quality, is certainly build quality. Without it whats the point?

[paul t]

"Any manufacturer who cannot even get a prototype right from the get go, just

ISN'T 'getting it'. I mean a prototype falling apart in the hands of a potential

customer a launch?"<p>

I think I read that the E-type Jag turned up at its first trade show with a pile of

bricks in the engine bay. Turned out to be a pretty good car. THey didn't use

bricks in the production version, btw.

[samuel_dilworth]

Well, I wouldn't write off the entire Zeiss Ikon line on the word of a pedantic internet poster, MD or not. I'm sure there were good marketing reasons for Zeiss to reveal prototypes many months before the release date, and it would be foolish to judge the final product on these early prototypes.

 

It is interesting, though in tune with Zeiss's broad design philosophy, that the new Zeiss Ikon lenses make no use of aspherical surfaces (with the exception of the 2.8/15 Distagon). Zeiss tends to employ more lens elements instead, perhaps trusting the T* coating to keep contrast high. Extra elements generally result in larger lenses, and indeed the Zeiss Ikon lenses are longer and wider than the Leica equivalents. Despite this, they actually weigh less than even the black Leica M lenses. Our perception of quality is more linked to product density than absolute weight, so it is likely that the Zeiss lenses will therefore feel somewhat less substantial than Leica M lenses in the palm of the hand. A lens that is light for its size need not necessarily be fragile, of course, and just about every lens on the market is larger and lighter than a Leica M lens, so at this stage I don't think a lot should be read into this.

[aldo_pedrazzini]

Pedantic is a nice euphemism. I could not but second guess the opinion of somebody who signs "MD" after his name on a photography forum...

Obviously the Zeiss Ikon was not intended for all of you Leica owners nor are they expecting for you to sell off your equipment and rush to buy the Ikon. It is probably for all of us "commoners" who have always thought that spending $10k for a camera and a few lenses and then roam the streets of a major city is "kind of a stupid thing to do"...My apologies in advance doctor..

[tommy_baker]

"I think I read that the E-type Jag turned up at its first trade show with a pile of

bricks in the engine bay. Turned out to be a pretty good car. THey didn't use

bricks in the production version, btw."

 

Did one of the wheels fall off when they got into the car?

 

I certainly hope Zeiss get it right when they start rolling off the production line

for the shelves. Perhaps they should re-assess their production standards &

quality control.

 

I welcome competition. For me anything with the Zeiss stamp stands for

quality, like Leica. Anything less would be below expectation. Or does Zeiss

stand for less in other peoples perceptions?

[bill_marshall1]

Talk about pedantic . . . A thread on which a series of posters bash a product not yet on the market because of a reported problem with a prototype at a trade show?? Tommy Baker, you've got to chill . . . get some calm.

 

There was a discussion on the forum at leica-camera.com last week, surveying Leica owners regarding problems with new items out-of-the-box. No fewer than a dozen posters reported one or more problems with new Leica products which required repair or return. This survey was generated by a prior thread which had also yielded reports of quality control problems with Leica products. These were not prototypes manhandled by numerous indifferent trade show attendees jostling about in crowds over a period of weeks, where products may have been dropped, kicked, or otherwise abused. These were brand new products handled only by their first owners.

 

This is not a knock on Leica. I don't have a problem with occasional defects. That's what warranties are for. They exist for a reason: things do go wrong - even with Leicas. Do a search & you will find similar reports on this forum. Those people who have posted here about their outrage or other complaints about a prototype with a problem of unknown origin & unknown cause and who then draw conclusions about future post-production items are simply out of touch with reality.

 

Why is there a need to bash a new market entry rather than to simply assess its capabilities & characteristics. Alan began this thread with an honest impression of some new products, but this has deteriorated into mud slinging of a low order.

[tommy_baker]

I knew the Leica QC was going to come up. I have had 'issues' with it before.

They (Leica) need to get it right some times too. Their quality isn't up to Leitz

standards, but we live with it. [ And so does Apple btw, but thats another sto-

rey.]

 

Look, I AM bashing Zeiss. I want to apply the heat so they will raise their

game. Leica is only going to get real competition at that level. Okay, I can hear

it now, someones going to say, But Zeiss is there to fill a lower gap. Well if

thats the case, than good, but that shouldnt be at the expense of quality.

 

I rank Zeiss and Leica at the top. Why shouldn't customers not demand less

from premium brands who tout themselves as being the best.

 

Chill? -- I am on my third glass of Merlot cabernet sauvignon, Vin de pay D'oc

region to be exact. Your points are valid Bill, but I like to add Tobasco once in

a while..

 

I just love this forum.

[bill_marshall1]

Uh . . . Tommy, in your noble efforts to - uh - "upgrade Zeiss," have you - uh - tried witing to Zeiss?

[tommy_baker]

Done. Zeiss and Hasselblad have been forwarded an email to this

discussion. anything else?

[aldo_pedrazzini]

Yes, try some barbera from the Piemonte region in Italy..you'll never go back..

[bill_marshall1]

Nothing else, Tommy. Nicely done. Your e-mail will join mine, sent last week with my own criticisms. Enjoy the wine!

[manaboleh]

My writeup applies to all manufacturers and I sincerely believe the observations of the contributors of their 1st impression of the products to be true and without any hidden agendas.

[rover]

I am glad I came back to read the end of this thread :) .

 

I too went to Photoplus, and I was impressed by the Zeiss products. There is no doubt that they are not as bullet proof as Leica stuff, but hey, not much is. I have faith that they will iron out whatever issues remain with their products, and then we will all benefit from a broader market.

[donnydarko]

Following this discussion from Leica homeland Germany I can only comment:

 

1. Leica cameras and lenses are BY FAR more expensive here than in the rest of the world. But even in the rest of the world they are clearly overpriced.

 

2. This situation CRIES for competition. As Voigtländer is not a solid brand name for professional use since more than 50 years Cosina as Leica or Zeiss are the Cosina people are clever enough to cooperate with Zeiss. Zeiss lenses are absolutely superior to Voigtländer's lenses, and even if they assemble the lenses in Japan nobody will care. The lenses for the Contax G are excellent, too, whereas the cameras are somewhat strange (I owned a G1 and a G2 with 3 lenses) and kept Leica users from buying Contax G equipments.

 

3. We heard that Zeiss/Cosina will offer lenses that are equal to Leica's lenses, at a much better price. The Zeiss Ikon body is just the "carrier", I would not expect that it is a very good camera. They will make the money with the lenses.

[kornelius_j._fleischer]

Thank you, Tommy Baker, for guiding us at Zeiss to this thread.

 

It is interesting to learn about people's opinions from PhotoPlus, since I was unable to attend personally.

 

Let me comment on just a few, not all topics raised in this thread:

 

The Zeiss Ikon cameras will show a better quality feel than the prototypes which some of you handled during Photokina and PhotoPlus Expo. And so will the lenses.

 

Thank you for mentioning that real world experience about: "prototypes manhandled by numerous indifferent trade show attendees jostling about in crowds over a period of weeks, where products may have been dropped, kicked, or otherwise abused."

 

Although some criticized the feel of the prototypes, Hasselblad reportedly had no problems to sell out those 1200 limited edition cameras.

 

By the way: Cosina did actually have a booth at Photokina, and not even a small one.

 

The Zeiss lenses for the Zeiss Ikon camera are based on latest optics designs, exclusive for this lens range. We shot comparisons with those and with other lenses on the market to prove the superiority of the new Zeiss lenses on real film, and also on high resolution "Gigabitfilm". We are confident that users will also come to the conclusion, that the Zeiss ZM lenses will raise the bar for sharpness and flare control.

 

Those who are keen on using a really quiet camera: Check out the twin-eyed Rolleiflex, the old ones with the Compur shutter. Compared to such a camera the Leica M is a hooligan. (Please, don't get me wrong: I am not saying that the Leica M is anything less than a very good camera. At Zeiss, we have just discovered some aspects that we can improve on, like viewfinder brightness, viewfinder flare control, rangefinder base length, rangefinder accuracy, film loading, quantities manufactured, and hence price per camera.)

[mbachofen]

Olympus PEN cameras did not use a Porro-Prism. They have a swinging mirror just like full-frame SLR's.

meb

[al_kaplan1]

All the information published back in the 1960's about the original Pen F, as well as the later metered models, mentioned the side swinging mirror and the use of a mirror porro "prism" instead of a solid glass penta prism. Mamiya had already been hyping the porro prism as a light weight eye lever finder for their C series twin lens reflexes, and also made a model that would fit late model Rolleiflexes with removeable hoods, so most photographers of that time were familiar with the concept.