underwhelmed by new Zeiss offerings

[jose f.]

When all of the hoarders start croaking in the next decade, there will be enough Mandler-era Summicrons for everyone, probably at knock-down prices. Prices for used Voigtlanders have yet to establish a market; they seem to be passed from hand to hand like cabalic amulets.

[bill_marshall1]

Jeremy, ROTFLMAO.

[eliot_rosen1]

Well, I thinked we've reached that point:

Equus moribundum flagellatum et interrum. :-)

[david_kieltyka1]

From Sean Reid's just-posted article at the Luminous Landscape site concerning fast lenses (f/2 & up) on the Epson R-D1:

 

"Zeiss 35/2.0 Biogon -- Overall build quality seemed excellent. The aperture ring has click stops in 1/3 f/stop increments and each stop felt distinct and precise. The focus action was smooth and the ratio was perfect."

 

My impression & experience exactly, both with my 50mm and my friend's 35mm.

 

-Dave-

[les_lammers]

Dammit Claude!

I love your brutal honesty. Even w/o seeing one yet, I do think the ZI camera will, in time, join the Rollei 35.

 

So far, no one here that has a new Zeiss lens has had any complaints.

 

Recall that the Contax G2 was a pricey buggar when it arrived.

 

Les

 

P.S. I really like the 40 Rokkor I got from you. Thanks again.

 

Edited by me.

[icuneko]

<Equus moribundum flagellatum et interrum.>

 

 

Shouldn't that read "Leicauus moribundum flagellatum et interrum"?

[fred_mueggelhopper]

Frank; NICE self portrait!

[mike_elek]

Here's that table that compares the Zeiss Ikon, the Bessa R3A and the M7. The Zeiss Ikon and Bessa share the same shutter, but the body shell is of a different dimension, vanquishing the notion that Cosina has simply recovered its Bessa.<p>

 

Well, yeah, I guess you could say they are similar. Aren't all cameras similar? My gosh -- they put a viewfinder in the top deck. And the lens mounts on the front! Outrageous. And it has a back with a hinge -- some kind of patent infringement, I'm sure. And how about that wind lever -- the nerve of Zeiss to put it on the right side of the camera. What's next -- dogs living with cats?<p>

 

Seriously though, they share the same shutter but little else. I think the film advance lever, the back hinge and cap are definitely Bessa.<p>

 

<table width="550" border="1" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 9pt" align=center>

<tr>

<td width="81"><b> </b></td>

<td align="center"> <b>Zeiss Ikon</b> </td>

<td align="center"> <b>Bessa R2A/R3A</b> </td>

<td align="center"><b>Leica M7</b></td>

 

</tr>

<tr>

<td width="81"><b>Dimensions</b></td>

<td align="center"> 138mm x 78mm x 32mm </td>

<td align="center"> 135.5 x 81 x 33.5 </td>

<td align="center">138 x 79.5 x 38</td>

 

</tr>

<tr>

<td width="81"><b>Weight</b></td>

<td align="center"> 500 grams </td>

<td align="center"> 430</td>

<td align="center">610</td>

 

</tr>

<tr>

<td width="81" height="20"><b>Batteries</b></td>

<td colspan="2" align="center" height="20"> Two LR44 or SR44 </td>

<td align="center" height="20">2 lithium type DL 1/3 N</td>

</tr>

<tr valign="top">

<td width="81"><b>Rangefinder<br>

 

baselength </b></td>

<td align="center"> 75mm<br>

(effective 55.9mm) </td>

<td align="center"> 37mm<br>

(effective 37mm) </td>

 

<td align="center">

<p>0.58=40.2mm<br>

0.72=49.9mm<br>

0.85=58.9mm </p>

</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td width="81"><b>Viewfinder</b></td>

 

<td align="center">0.74x </td>

<td align="center">1.0x </td>

<td align="center">(see above)</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td width="81"><b>Framelines</b></td>

<td align="center">28/85, 35, 50 </td>

 

<td align="center">75, 40/90, 50 </td>

<td align="center">28, 90 (90 by itself for 0.85)<br>

35, 135 mm (35 mm by itself for 0.58)<br>

plus 50, 75</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td width="81"><b>Exposure compensation</b></td>

 

<td align="center"> +/- 2 f/stops in 1/3-stop increments </td>

<td align="center"> +/- 2 f/stops in 1/2-stop increments </td>

<td align="center">+/- 2 f/stops in 1/3-stop increments </td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td width="81"><b>Speeds</b></td>

 

<td colspan="2" align="center"> 1 sec-1/2,000 plus B (manual) <br>

8 sec-1/2,000 (autoexposure)<br>

flash synch: 1/125 (no TTL flash)</td>

<td align="center">4 sec-1,1000 (manual)<br>

32 sec-1,100 (auto)<br>

flash synch: 1/50 with TTL<br>

 

higher speeds up to 1,000 with dedicated units</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td width="81"><b>Viewfinder<br>

indicators</b></td>

<td align="center"> Shutter speeds displayed on left side of

viewfinder. </td>

<td align="center"> Shutter speeds displayed at bottom of

viewfinder </td>

 

<td align="center">Shutter speed in auto<br>

LED arrows in manual<br>

(other indicators / get the brochure)</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td width="81"><b>Rewind crank </b></td>

<td align="center"> Bottom of camera </td>

 

<td align="center"> Top of camera </td>

<td align="center">Top of camera</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td width="81"><b>Film winder</b></td>

<td align="center"> No </td>

 

<td align="center"> Yes </td>

<td align="center">Yes</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td width="81"><b>Cost</b></td>

<td align="center"> approx. $1,600</td>

 

<td align="center"> $600 </td>

<td align="center">$2,800 (B&H)</td>

</tr>

</table>

 

<center><img height=624

width=450 hspace=5 vspace=10 src="image?bboard_upload_id=20311384">

<br>Top: Zeiss Ikon, bottom: Bessa-R3A<p></center>

[mike_elek]

The price of the M7 is now roughly $2,900 at B&H.

[stephen_w.]

They look completely different, to me. Will on be able to use LTM CV lenses on the Ikon with adaptors? It's not clear with the given body dimensions.

[eliot_rosen1]

Well Mike, if it's such an original new product as you say it is, why are they using an M bayonet mount? Why not have their own mount that is unique to the ZI lenses? Could it be that Zeiss doesn't think this system offers enough unique features to attract customers without offering interchangeability with Leica?

 

mayhaps? :-)

[stephen_w.]

I suppose because Leica makes lenses that "Zeiss" do not. The Ikon is a "low" cost version of an M that uses used M and LTM (presumably) lenses and may not have the issues that the Konica RF had/has.

[eliot_rosen1]

Some of those "issues" with the Konica Hexar RF were way overblown. Most users have been very satisfied with it, and a a much lower price than either the ZI or the M7. You certainly don't need to buy the ZI to get AE and an M mount. I guess the great thing about the market is that you the consumer will get to pass judgment on the ZI and its lenses. We'll see who is right. I have to admit, I am tempted by one of their offerings, the 15/2.8 Distagon. But at $ 3800 (I hope for that price the lenshood would be included), I won't be running to the store to buy one. :-)

[bill_marshall1]

Pretty amusing conversation today/tonight. A laugh a minute.

 

This stuff isn't rocket science. The significance of the ZI is real simple: combination of 55.9 effective base length & a viewfinder with 28 mm frame lines. I wish that Leica had made one.

 

Every industry has its challenges. When eyeglass wearers like me complained that they had a hard time seeing the frame lines on a standard Leica M6, Leica responded with the M6 .58. When telephoto users complained that the frame lines for longer lenses were too small, Leica responded with M6 .85, dropping 28 mm frame lines in the process. Three different versions of the same camera. Some people own 2 or even all 3 versions to use for different purposes.

 

Zeiss looked at the same industry challenge & came up with a different solution. Enlarge both the viewfinder & the eyepiece so that 28 mm frame lines can be seen even with an effective base length even longer than the standard M7 .72.

 

In the process, Zeiss tweaked a few other things, such as close focus rangefinder coupling with parallax correction and a brighter viewfinder in addition to the other features which were mentioned above.. But this is an innovative camera design because it addressed an issue within the industry in a new way.

 

For the disinformation buffs, a couple of corrections:

 

Stephen Gandy does NOT sell the Zeiss Ikon, so it is inaccurate to discredit his report from the Cosina factory as an attempt to pump up his sales. His comment about the fact that there are shared parts between the ZI & the Bessa series was independently reported in "Shutterbug."

 

"Rebadging" means taking the same product & producing it with a different brand name imprinted on it - such as the Hasselblad & Fuji versions of the X-pan. Any other use of the term is inaccurate & misleading. This term certainly cannot be honestly applied to the ZI, a camera that was not developed by Cosina & which is not offered in any version other than the one that says Zeiss Ikon.

 

Bessa standard viewfinder has a magnification of .68, not .7 - so the .74 magnification of the ZI is a little more significant "tweak" - 50% more significant than stated.

[stephen_w.]

I had an RF. It never focused my M lenses, except by chance and/or DOF. The RF would go out from the vibrations of a bike ride, carrying it the same way I carry an M. It was sent to Konica NJ for an alignment + a request for a Leica lens calibration. I even sent them a Leica lens. "We don't do that" was their response. I paid for the first RF alignment, but they paid for the five subsequent RF alignments that went off during shipping, quite pathetic. I finally sold it, and it arrived with an error code out of the box. I paid half of the "repair" for the new owner. Why do you think they discontinued it? Because it was such a great camera? I will look forward to used Ikons when new buyers find they don't like RF type cameras. I am set lenswise.

[eliot_rosen1]

Innovative? you must have pretty low standards in that regard. A lot of people criticize Leica for thier incremental approach to changes in the M camera design. True, but ZI is if anything an incremental improvement over existing designs. Harly anything there to call "innovative". In the real world, a few tweeks here and there do not constitute "innovation".

 

A 55.9 mm baseline with a 28 mm VF frame, whooptydo. How long of a baselength do you think you need to focus a 28 mm lens? .74 vs .68 instead of vs .70. Get a grip. That's "innovation"? Let's make a .75 VF and get a patent. :-)

 

See if it were really innovative, they wouldn't need to capitalize on the Leica mount. It would stand on its own.

[bill_marshall1]

>Eliot said: ". . . why are they using an M bayonet mount?"

 

Is this a trick question? You can accuse Carl Zeiss of a lot of things, but stupidity isn't one of them. Not only are there Leica, Cosina, & Konica M-mount cameras out there, but the Epson R-D1 is also an M-mount camera.

 

You could ask Leica the same question. Better yet, ask Leica why they are building RF film cameras at all. No one is buying them. These are tricky times for the rangefinder market for any company willing to attempt a RF camera. Zeiss is floating a trial balloon & will see how it works. it also gives them a "system" identity. obviously they think its worth it.

 

The good news is that a consumer can buy with confidence that Carl Zeiss will be around for a long time to come. I wonder how much that Leica passport is going to be worth when Leica folds. Or do you know of some secret group of investors who want to throw their money away on a sinking ship. It certainly doesn't appea to be a "growth" stock offering.

[stephen_w.]

And, the RF's RF was "fuzzy" when practicing judging distances and fine tuning, focusing on my cable box's LED. Nice concept, that's why I bought one, but poor execution, IMHO.

[bill_marshall1]

I'll tell you what, Eliot, you go out & buy 2 Leicas so you can have 28 mm frame lines on one & can have sufficient magnification for longer & faster lenses on the other. That'll cost you . . . let me get my calculator . . . $6600 at the new Leica prices. My $1400 ZI will do both. And neither of your 2 Leicas will close focus my ZI wide angles. No one is claiming innovation on the scale of stem cell technology. simply a different solution to an industry challenge.

 

Now, come on & throw up another post to show how difficult it is for you to grasp this concept. You've been doing nothing else all day.

[eliot_rosen1]

Is this a trick question? You can accuse Carl Zeiss of a lot of things, but stupidity isn't one of them. Not only are there Leica, Cosina, & Konica M-mount cameras out there, but the Epson R-D1 is also an M-mount camera.

 

I believe the subject was innovation. The R-D1 is certainly innovative, the first digital camera that could take M lenses. Cosina has offered a number of innovative cameras distinctly different from Leica's and various innovative lenses different from Leica in specs (eg., 15/4.5, 12/5.6, 35/1.2). Also their ability to supply reasonably good products at MUCH lower than Leica prices is innovative. Konica offered a much cheaper camera with Leica M mount and 1/4000 sec shutter plus 1/125 sec sync, innovative for an RF when it was introduced.

 

Zeiss chose a different route trying to make a profit by piggy-backing onto Leica, without offering any substantive level of innovation but lowering the price enough so that Leica users would notice the difference. Sorry but my reaction is still whooptydo. But be my guest, buy their products. I hope you like them.

[bill_marshall1]

Eliot why would you think that the subject I was writing about was "innovation" when I directly quoted your reply to Mike Elek about Zeiss's use of an M bayonet mount? Get with the program.

[eliot_rosen1]

Bill, we're not going to settle this issue. We just have different reactions to the ZI offerings. I just can't get excited about them. "underwhelmed" is the best word to describe it. I'm also put off by the fact that the only lens they offer that I can really get excited about (15/2.8) is so expensive. That is where the innovation is. Everyone will have his own reaction. Truth is, I hope they do well, although I have some doubts mainly based on the lack of very much that is really unique.

 

But lest you think I am judging Zeiss too harshly, I had the same underwhelming reaction to the leica MP. It was a clear case of "back to the future" or "deja vu all over again". A sort of de-innovation. My critique of Leica, however, is tempered by the fact that they have shown real innovation in the design of the new generation of APO/ASPH lenses, an amazing accomplishment for such a small company.

[mike_elek]

I have no idea why they chose the M mount. I wasn't privy to those discussions. I can only surmise that in introducing a new camera and lenses, it made sense to try to capture a portion of an existing market (the Leica M market) rather than try to create a new niche product in the face of dwindling film sales.

 

It's very possible that people want more than a Bessa but aren't willing to buy a Leica M. It's also possible that people want a new camera -- not someone's "mint" camera.

 

It's also possible that this camera is simply a precursor to a digital full-frame body.

 

So to answer your question, I have no idea, as Carl Zeiss AG didn't ask me to sit in on their strategy sessions.

[mike_elek]

> " Well Mike, if it's such an original new product as you say it is, why are they using an M bayonet mount? ... blah, blah, blah."

 

I don't recall saying it was an "original new product." I said it's not a rebadged Bessa, which is brought up repeatedly in this and previous discussions as fact.

 

Listen here, boy, this thread has now reached the stage of being pointless. Both sides are quite fixed in their respective positions regarding this camera. There's little hope of one side convincing the other. Discussion over.

[claude_batmanghelidj]

Just to respond a little. Sorry, but the thread has become so humungous, I could not read all the posts, but I get the general flavor. Frist off, I am a very right brain person, so I am not so good at presenting a logical argument. It's not that I can't, I just can't be bothered. Anyway I will try and make my point for all of your left brain logical types that get all worked up:

 

1. Zeiss should have been built in Germany

 

a. Every camera on earth almost is now built in Japan or another Asian subsidiary. It dissapoints me to see a local industry being outsourced. Germans are losing valuable experience in producing well crafted consumer durables.

 

b. There does appear to be a difference in the quality of this lens's construction compared to any german made kit I have ever seen.

 

2. Cloth shutter.

 

a. The cloth shutter of the M is very quiet. Anyone who has clicked a Cosina lately knows they are very noisy compared to a leica. This was a huge design compromise.

 

b. I have yet to handle one, but I doubt I will change my feeling about it. The R3A is very nice but it is no Leica, so I expect the same from the Ikon.

 

3. Lens construction quality

 

Well, the blue dot could have been really well executed at least. It looks like the plastic from one of those buble gum toy dispensers. The focus was rough, and the whole flavor of the lens, was, well, it just felt cheap. Not in the same league as the Zeiss lenses made by Kyocera, which were superbly constructed, whether AF or Manual, SLR or RF.

 

Sorry to ruffle any feathers, but I do really wish they had checked with me first before going ahead!