al_gorman Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 I would appreciate your input as i've been offered one at a very low price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gene_e._mccluney Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 THE Zeiss-Ikon rangefinder "M" mount cameras are somewhat above the Voitglander cameras and below the hand-finished quality of the Leica "M" cameras. They represent good value. McCluney Photo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_n1664876959 Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 <P>Do a search in the ZI forum over on RFF. Plenty of information over there:</P> <A HREF="http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=55" TARGET="_blank">Zeiss Ikon forum</A> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_gorman Posted January 6, 2007 Author Share Posted January 6, 2007 Thanks Peter. http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=32792 Althought i expect a cam to show some wear if it's used by a keen photographer. To be honest the above has put me seriously off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsr Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 The new ZI has the best viewfinder of any RF camera I've ever had! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsr Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 The ZI in silver finish is also painted rather than electroplated metal, but would show less wear than the black finish. My silver camera doesn't show fingerprints the way the black one pictured on RFF does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry_lehrer Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 Al,-- I am totally turned off also. I have a M4 black and a M6 chrome that nust be 20 to 40 times as old as the ZI shown. Used regularly. Only a little brassing on the black one, and a few shiny spots on the chrome. Cameras use for months in Japan, England, Israel, France and the wilds of La Jolla. No other wear shown. Buy the M4 and Rigid Summicron shown in earlier message. Better than any new ZI. Can you imagine; silver paint on plastic?? Jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smc_. Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 Al: I've put an Ikon through almost a year of moderate use (2 to 3 rolls a week) and it's held up very well--basically, minor signs of use. So, that's my point of anecdotal evidence to consider against the single point of anecdotal evidence to the contrary from the RFF thread. The camera has a great viewfinder. It's bright and clear--in the same league as the finder of my M3, but with 28 and 35 mm framelines. I like the excellent meter, the light weight of the camera, and the high shutter-release point. Having said all of that in favor of the Ikon, I would recommend that you skip the Ikon and get a Leica. Please don't take this as a negative personal judgment, but there are some camera users who are prone to suffer mental anguish from (i) blemishes to a camera's fit and finish that don't affect its performance, and (ii) the nagging feeling that they don't have "the best" (that is, the most expensive or otherwise exclusive) piece of kit available. For those users, it makes no sense to get a camera which, no matter how fine it is for ordinary use in objective terms, will never satisfy their subjective desires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horea_feier Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 It depends upon your shooting habits: if you often shoot kids or other quick moving objects, or you simply need AE than go for it. I am sure you will be satisfied...If you can take your time,compose, get the correct exposure and focus than you can live with the M6 (which seems to be the bargain of the moment in the M line ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_marshall1 Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Jerry, silver paint on plastic?? What on earth are you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger_michel Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 the zeiss ikon uses magnesium alloy (a la M6) boday plates. the black paint version is, well, black paint. the silver version is anodized metal. black paint wears off. having said that, i have never seen an ikon like the one in that pic -- i have seen several that have been through heavy use. IMO, that camera was exposed to some chemical agent, accidentally or otherwise, to produce that effect. note how the paint is actually blistering )not just wearing out) and the rubber is deteriorating. looks like acetone damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x-ray Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 I have the ZI and 5 Leica M's and shoot profesionally with all of them. I'm shooting 25 to 50 rolls a month through the ZI and have not experienced any wear beyond what I experience on my M's. Let's face it, some people could destroy an anvil if given the chance. I've shot Leicas for 40 years and shot 10,000 plus rolls through them over that perieod. I purchased two new MP's this past year and the ZI. Now I find myself gravitating to the ZI over the M's. The ZI has a very good feel, lighter in weight but very well built. The RF / VF is absolutely the winner over the Leica in brightness, longer base RF, ease of focus, accuracy, superior frame lines and focus patch. The VF remeinds me of the HP finders on SLR's. There's no strane to see the frame lines. If I were starting today I would probably buy ZI bodies over M's. There's nothing wrong with the Leicas but the ZI is a modern design with real world advantages. I'm even finding I'm buying new Zeiss lenses and retiring some of my Leica glass. The ZI package is about as good as it gets at the moment in M mount. I failed to mention the AE is fantastic. It's so good that i only shoot in AE and have not had one bad exposure due to the camera. Don't let one persons experience put you off to the ZI. It's only one out of how many? Have you seen another camera that looked like that? It's not hard to destroy a camera if you don't take care of it, even a Leica M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dead_metaphor Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 I'm with Roger. That's not normal wear. My guess is the owner wanted to get that "used" look and applied some sort of chemical to the body. the vulcanite bubbling is a pretty clear indication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williamchuttonjr Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 Al, I bought a silver ZI M in April. I carry it with me daily. The camera is a joy to use. The finder is outstanding. The finish is very tough. If you can acquire one for a good price, I would encourage you to do so. The Hicks/Schlutz review in Shutterbug last spring is right on the money. willie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsr Posted January 7, 2007 Share Posted January 7, 2007 I must agree with other contributors here that the black ZI shown on RFF appears to have suffered from a solvent attack. Acetone is a good guess! In response to another writer, The Zeiss bodies are not plastic. Best regards, Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_mccann Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Do you think he painted it himself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_marshall1 Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 I'll add another thumbs up for the Zeiss Ikon. Bought one of the first ones when they came out 14 months ago. Camera still looks like new. The finder is amazing & the shutter responds with the immediacy of a Leica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aplumpton Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Dear Al, Erwin Putts has been comparing several recent Leica M and Zeiss ZM lenses, with technical tests. You will want to read this, now his 5th article, on the M8, on film vs. digital and on the M-mount lenses. Leica generally wins on centre of lens contrast and resolution, but in other areas, including minimum flare and the uniformity of results over the full lens field, he acknowledges that Zeiss is better. This is a generalised precis of what he says, but I refer you to those articles. I've forgotten his www address, but you can Google -Erwin Putts Leica M8 review- and you should find it. A credo for Mr. Putts, longtime Leica devotee and consultant, is that he appears to be as objective as is possible. At least, that is what I seem to see, through my rose-coloured Leica glasses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now