View Full Version : New ZI or used M6-TTL - Which would you buy?
Even though I am a dyed-in-the-wool Nikonian I'm thinking about an M-mount camera. Yes, I know this is blasphemy.
It is now about six months since the ZI came out. After some early "teething problems" (not surprising with a new product) it seems to be getting good reviews.
If I were to join the "dark side" ;) at the amount I'm willing to spend I would probably choose either a new ZI or a excellent condition used M6-TTL from someone like KEH.
While keeping it civil (please!) can the M-mount folks here comment on the pros and cons of each and what THEY would do?
ZI has a better viewfinder, but the Leica looks and feels better.
back alley
05-17-2006, 08:29
i can't talk to the m6 as i don't have one.
the big knock against the zi is weight and that it's not a leica.
it is foolish, i think, for people to hold a camera for 10 minutes and pronounce it not as good as...especially based on weight.
i now prefer the zi and one reason is the lighter weight.
also, the finder is incredible, so bright and for my old eyes, the easiest of all to focus.
gotta go...will write more later.
joe
The ZI rf/vf is extremely bright. It has 55.9mm rf effective base length. It weighs plenty but isn't heavy. It feels solid and sturdy. It has an internal meter. The shutter noise is louder than the Leica.
I'm really happy I won the ZI. Though I feel sad to sell the M2, I won't regret it. The M2 didn't see any action. I reckon the ZI will see much more.
I have an m6ttl and I would love to try a ZI. There are only a few things that i could think of that haven't been said, and as I have never even seen a ZI I only have second hand knowledge...but If you were really interested in the 75mm Summilux, 75mm Summicron, or 75mm CV lens than the Leica has frame lines for 75mm and the ZI does not. The ZI has 85mm frames instead of 90mm (not a big deal in my book as i use 85mm lenses with my 90mm lines). The Leica has framelines for 135mm lenses while the ZI does not. If you were really interested in useing Leica's DR Summicron with the closefocus viewfinder or the 135mm f2.8 with eyes the Leica would be a better fit. The leica has a setting for iso 6400 while i believe that the ZI has up to 3200 (i could be wrong) ... but of course the ZI is supposed to have one of the greatest finders ever, it would be new, and it would have ae...
Huck Finn
05-17-2006, 09:02
If you were really interested in the 75mm Summilux, 75mm Summicron, or 75mm CV lens than the Leica has frame lines for 75mm and the ZI does not.
The Leica has framelines for 135mm lenses while the ZI does not. If you were really interested in useing Leica's DR Summicron with the closefocus viewfinder or the 135mm f2.8 with eyes the Leica would be a better fit.
The corollary to this point about frame line availability, of course, is also true. If you do not use the 75 & 135 focal lengths, then the ZI offers a nice uncluttered viewfinder in the same way that the M4 & M2 did.
wlewisiii
05-17-2006, 09:05
I'm in the ZI camp. It's new, under warranty, has (by all accounts) a great finder, & ae. The only real feature I am aware of that the ZI doesn't have is TTL Flash. The frame issues are as Chaser suggests but since you are not already burdened with LTM/M lenses you'll be able to purchase lenses as appropriate to your tastes, whichever camera you do choose, & the extent of your wallet :)
William
M6, 0.85...
(I don't shoot wide)
How is that for an unanswerable question?:) Can't you borrow/beg the different camera's for a few days to try it out for yourself?
I would DEFINITELY buy the M6!!!
BECAUSE:
1. IT IS LEICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !
2. I had VERY VERY bad experience with contax G2
3. ZI is overpriced BESSA R3A (I don't trust COSINA, BTW)
4. I don't want my camera to be dead without batteries. M6 works everywhere/everytime
5. Look carefully at the lever that opens the back door!!! Absolutly UNSAFE... You WILL loose your pictures because of it.
6. ZI shutter NOISE!!!
7. Are you still thinking? Run and buy M6
Regards...
telenous
05-17-2006, 09:52
A disclaimer: I have handled neither of the cameras (but I have the older M's) so my opinion here is not informed by first-hand experience. I will side with the M6 camp. My reasons are rational and sentimental in equal measure.
First, I have decided never to buy new equipment again but only find it in the second-hand market. New gear loses value the minute you touch it. Presumably that means that the moment you open the box of the ZI you have just lost 20% of its value. Not so with a used M6. Of course, if you find the ZI used then it is a different matter.
Second, I think that the heft and heaviness of the M6 makes for more steady shooting. I am not disputing the quality of the ZI, I am just saying that I find the weight of the M ideal for my needs. I have shot with lighter cameras and have found that my hand shakes more.
Third, and perhaps irrationally, I absolutely love cameras (not just M's) that are battery independent (the light meter of the M6 takes batteries of course). This is partly due to my enthusiasm for all things that hark back to the glory days of mechanical wonders. A very personal thing no doubt. But also to my feeling that it may really happen that your batteries drain and all you have is a dead camera. Sure, you can always have replacement cells with you. That's what it is to be battery dependent. Some people mind it, some don't. I do.
The point about the framelines is also valid. If you need to have the 75 framelines then you know which camera to buy (I think shooting with a 135mm lens will be a bit of a stretch though).
As I said, this is my preference and not an attempt to put down the ZI, a wonderful camera by any measure - which however comes second in my list.
shutterflower
05-17-2006, 09:59
The ZI rf/vf is extremely bright. It has 55.9mm rf effective base length. It weighs plenty but isn't heavy. It feels solid and sturdy. It has an internal meter. The shutter noise is louder than the Leica.
I'm really happy I won the ZI. Though I feel sad to sell the M2, I won't regret it. The M2 didn't see any action. I reckon the ZI will see much more.
ha ha! Just when you thought you were out, we pulled you back in!
I would DEFINITELY buy the M6!!!
BECAUSE:
1. IT IS LEICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !
2. I had VERY VERY bad experience with contax G2
3. ZI is overpriced BESSA R3A (I don't trust COSINA, BTW)
4. I don't want my camera to be dead without batteries. M6 works everywhere/everytime
5. Look carefully at the lever that opens the back door!!! Absolutly UNSAFE... You WILL loose your pictures because of it.
6. ZI shutter NOISE!!!
7. Are you still thinking? Run and buy M6
Regards...
ARS,
Oh come, that's a bit tough for Cosina...
I would say a M6 is the better choice, I don't own a cosina or a ZI but that's a bit tough!
A disclaimer: I have handled neither of the cameras (but I have the older M's) so my opinion here is not informed by first-hand experience. I will side with the M6 camp. My reasons are rational and sentimental in equal measure.
First, I have decided never to buy new equipment again but only find it in the second-hand market. New gear loses value the minute you touch it. Presumably that means that the moment you open the box of the ZI you have just lost 20% of its value. Not so with a used M6. Of course, if you find the ZI used then it is a different matter.
Second, I think that the heft and heaviness of the M6 makes for more steady shooting. I am not disputing the quality of the ZI, I am just saying that I find the weight of the M ideal for my needs. I have shot with lighter cameras and have found that my hand shakes more.
I haven't use either of the M6 or the ZI, and I agree on depreication also.
I use older cameras, none of the camera in my apartment is younger than me. (except the mobile phone, but that's not an camera as we all know, it's more like a webcam, LOL). The most modern equipment I have access to is a Nikon F3, and a Leica R6.2 (Dad's, he is into SLR and Macro), you can't even compare that to a M2 or M3 or even a Contax IIa.
I am pretty spoiled by those classic cameras or lense, but you simply can't find those craftmenship in anymore.
M6 in my mind, would be closest to it. Leica did try hard to maintain the craftmanship, even if the brandnew stuff are so expensive (shall I say overpriced?).
But I would go for a R-D1, I do like the idea of digitial (also so damn expensive).
telenous
05-17-2006, 10:10
We all owe something to Cosina for the rangefinder renaissance.
back alley
05-17-2006, 10:11
I would DEFINITELY buy the M6!!!
BECAUSE:
1. IT IS LEICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !
2. I had VERY VERY bad experience with contax G2
3. ZI is overpriced BESSA R3A (I don't trust COSINA, BTW)
4. I don't want my camera to be dead without batteries. M6 works everywhere/everytime
5. Look carefully at the lever that opens the back door!!! Absolutly UNSAFE... You WILL loose your pictures because of it.
6. ZI shutter NOISE!!!
7. Are you still thinking? Run and buy M6
Regards...
apples and oranges my friend.
your argument is full of water and by your description i'm guessing you have never even held the zi but have only read about it.
joe
George, this is a tough choice. One camera is aperture priority, battery dependent, the other is fully manual, and will work fully if the batteries are dead. Batteries only operate the meter. You might want to go to a shop and handle the Z1 and a M6 side by side. I would recommend stopping in at Photo Village during your lunch time and checking them both out and see which one you prefer. You can then "weigh" the options yourself.
Why compare ZI to M6? The camera is just a lightproof box that holds the film. Why not do a ZI vs M6 vs (3)R3As comparison? I'm guessing that you really want a camera that you can feel emotionally attached to. For me, that is the M6. Simply for its looks - The ZI is ugly next to the Leica.
Andrew Touchon
05-17-2006, 10:33
Even though I am a dyed-in-the-wool Nikonian I'm thinking about an M-mount camera. Yes, I know this is blasphemy.
It is now about six months since the ZI came out. After some early "teething problems" (not surprising with a new product) it seems to be getting good reviews.
If I were to join the "dark side" ;) at the amount I'm willing to spend I would probably choose either a new ZI or a excellent condition used M6-TTL from someone like KEH.
While keeping it civil (please!) can the M-mount folks here comment on the pros and cons of each and what THEY would do?
M6TTL because of its fully mechanical operation and proven reliability.
I'm guessing that you really want a camera that you can feel emotionally attached to.
Just go buy a one of them, then take a trip to africa! You will be emotionally attached to the camera after shooting it in a different part of the world.
Why not let you experiences with the camera build the emotional attachment?
1. IT IS LEICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !
OMG Ponies!!!!11!!!!~!!11! :D
George, I work around the block from Photo Village. I would be happy to meet you there sometime next week to help confuse you!
Why compare ZI to M6? The camera is just a lightproof box that holds the film. Why not do a ZI vs M6 vs (3)R3As comparison? I'm guessing that you really want a camera that you can feel emotionally attached to. For me, that is the M6. Simply for its looks - The ZI is ugly next to the Leica.
Actually, the choice is as much price-driven as anything else! I might one day want to get a digiM so as to have a digi choice in RF gear. But in the meantime, I don't want to just accumulate some M-glass with the possibility that I might someday want to buy a digiM. So if I go the M route, I want a good quality modern M-mount film camera to use it with!
I actually have two Bessa R2S's and like the cost/quality ratio of Cosina's own gear. And I may well decide to just get a R2A as the "excuse" to start getting some M-glass. However, I do think that the ZI is a cut above the R2A justifying its higher price point.
As to emotional attachment, I am rather indifferent in that regard, as you might be able to tell from my ambivilent query.
AE or no AE?
How often will you use 28mm?
Stop in at B&H handle both.
Answer the first two and by time you walk out of B&H you will be satisfied you made a good choice, either way.
George, I work around the block from Photo Village. I would be happy to meet you there sometime next week to help confuse you!
Keith,
Hey, thanks for the offer. I work in east midtown (Lex and 50th) so normally would have to "beg off". But I might be able to steal a long lunch hour one day early next week. I'll PM you if it looks possible.
Long day by the way. I was up at 3:30 to get to a 9am meeting in Hudson, just a bit NW of Copake I guess. At least I am home early. Spring is beautiful in the Hudson Valley.
George, I've got an M2 and a ZI. I have a suggestion:
1. try to handle the ZI first. It appears the "weight" issue is big for many people, and I've always found it is very helpful to first handle a camera before buying it.
Best way to describe the ZI's weight is "nimbleness" -- I find it very well built. With a ZM lens, it gains that "heft" right back.
The M2 sits on a shelf, collecting dust since I've gotten a luigi case for my ZI. I will occasionally take it out to marvel at the quiet shutter and the heft, but I just don't use it. The last time I used the M2 was for some long-exposure work, where I did not want batteries to become an issue. :)
Benjamin Marks
05-17-2006, 10:55
George: My 2 cents: M6. Proven design. Not battery dependant. Verrrry durable. But the real answer is that, if possible, you should see how each camera feels in your hands and how the lenses that you like work with each body. If I were you, I'd saunter over to B&H, belly up to the counter and get your hands on the Zeiss. Put a couple of your lenses on it and focus around the room. Then head upstairs to the used dept and see if you can find a used M6 to try out. Do the same. There are many potential issues here: VF magnification, eye-relief, rangefinder patch flare, how the camera feels in your hands, ability to see/use the light-meter. These things are intensely personal, if the heartfelt comments of adherants to one brand or the other are to be taken seriously. BTW, although I would choose a gently used M6 (I think the best value in RF photography today on a cost/durability measure), I don't think you can make a bad choice between these cameras.
Ben
Long day by the way. I was up at 3:30 to get to a 9am meeting in Hudson, just a bit NW of Copake I guess. At least I am home early. Spring is beautiful in the Hudson Valley.
Yes, Hudson is about 19m W (or WNW) of Copake and Spring has certainly sprung upstate. If I'd known you were headed that way I would have suggested a small detour just south of Hudson into apple country (although the blossoms may be just about done now).
Yes, Hudson is about 19m W (or WNW) of Copake and Spring has certainly sprung upstate. If I'd known you were headed that way I would have suggested a small detour just south of Hudson into apple country (although the blossoms may be just about done now).
Some day when I am making the trip alone I will take my camera and loiter around looking for photos. I had to wear a tie today and act professional unfortunately.
You've had plenty of good advice, but in the end its emotional. The fact is, you've narrowed your choice down to two cameras by whatever means YOU use. If you buy the M6 you'll most likely regret not having the Zeiss and vice versa. There is only one solution - get them both :) That is exactly what happened to me - choice between Hexar RF and M6 - went for the Hexar (great choice) - 4 weeks later got an M6 (also a great choice). Didn't do my finances any good, but got rid of my angst. Now I just have too many choices :)
CosmicCharlie
05-17-2006, 11:06
Hello everyone,
This is my first post and I am already adding my 2 cents.
I would get a classic non ttl user M6.
Some day when I am making the trip alone I will take my camera and loiter around looking for photos. I had to wear a tie today and act professional unfortunately.
Actually, there is some good shooting right in Hudson (particularly along Warren and State Streets). It has been undergoing quite a renaissance and become an antiques center. I wear a tie every work day - I've never felt that meant I had to act "professional"! :D
Just kidding, boss - yes sir, I will get off the web.....
Hello everyone,
This is my first post and I am already adding my 2 cents.
I would get a classic non ttl user M6.
Cosmic,
Glad to be the recipient of your first post. TTL is essential. I have a Nikon S2 and SP for the "purist" approach. Sometimes I just want to have one less thing to fiddle with! ;)
ha ha! Just when you thought you were out, we pulled you back in!
*******s! All of you! :D
Just go buy a one of them, then take a trip to africa! You will be emotionally attached to the camera after shooting it in a different part of the world.
Why not let you experiences with the camera build the emotional attachment?
I never had that with my M2. With my Bessa R and L and the CL, yes, but never with the M2. And I took it to Mongolia. Guess I shouldn't have taken the others first to Mongolia, and China, and India. :p
Cosmic,
Glad to be the recipient of your first post. TTL is essential. I have a Nikon S2 and SP for the "purist" approach. Sometimes I just want to have one less thing to fiddle with! ;)
Is flash a concern? If so, the ZI does not have TTL flash control. The M6 Classic, ZI and M6 TTL all have TTL metering. The essential difference between the 2 M6 models is the added TTL flash control of the later model.
Benjamin Marks
05-17-2006, 11:31
TTL is essential.
George: TTL in this case means TTL flash ONLY with the dedicated Leica Flash. All metering on the M6's is TTL. Thus: a non-TTL M6 (also called the M6 Classic) is an M6 from before circuitry was added for TTL flash. It is slightly shorter (1 or 2 mm) than the M6 TTL and its shutter speed dial rotates in the opposite direction.
Goodyear
05-17-2006, 11:36
Cosmic,
Glad to be the recipient of your first post. TTL is essential. I have a Nikon S2 and SP for the "purist" approach. Sometimes I just want to have one less thing to fiddle with! ;)That sounds like an argument for a camera with AE capability...
At the risk of hijacking the thread a little (sorry):
What is everyone's hang-up on batteries? If you can carry a spare roll of film, you can carry a couple of button cells. If you run out of batteries then yes an electronic camera is dead, but if you run out of film a mechanical camera is dead. And as for the 'out in the cold' argument - how often is that an issue?
(By the by, all my 35mm shooting is with mechanical cameras - but that's just because I like 'em.)
back alley
05-17-2006, 11:44
that 'out in the cold' thing is real for me.
but i have never had a problem with a battery operated camera that an extra set of warm batteries could not fix.
the biggest weight difference between the cameras is when the lenses are attached.
there is less of a difference in feel when it's just the bodies compared.
joe
Out in the cold has never been a problem for me. At least not the last few times I spend several weeks in -35C in winter in Mongolia with my Bessa R, my CL or (in earlier times) my Eos 3000. Bring some spare batteries and your settled.
... hold them both in your hands, stroke your fingers along the sides, top and bottom, wind release, wind release, cradkle the camera in your hands, weigh it down, smell it, squeeze it, fondle it ... then if you're not yet satisfied take a close look at the engineering, the manufacturing, the ease of the moveable ojects, ....
M6TTL will come out ....
LazyHammock
05-17-2006, 12:00
I haven't handled the ZI but I'm loving my M6TTL, it is a real pleasure to handle. I would go with the TTL just based on the larger shutter speed control knob - it handles much better at the eye than my older M4-P. I have had no battery issues and carrying a couple of (tiny) spares in my bag is no problem. Just to mix things up the only lenses I use are the ZM 28mm and 50mm....not exactly a Leica purist.
George: TTL in this case means TTL flash ONLY with the dedicated Leica Flash. All metering on the M6's is TTL. Thus: a non-TTL M6 (also called the M6 Classic) is an M6 from before circuitry was added for TTL flash. It is slightly shorter (1 or 2 mm) than the M6 TTL and its shutter speed dial rotates in the opposite direction.
Thanks, I wasn't aware of that. I thought TTL referred to the camera having a built-in light meter (or not!). Flash synchro isn't really an "issue" for me as I only do available light with RF.
Todd.Hanz
05-17-2006, 12:14
Get the M6, it'll hold it's value better and you'll never have to wonder if you should have gotten the leica :)
Todd
Goodyear
05-17-2006, 12:17
Who are we kidding? This is RFF - you will buy both.
Who are we kidding? This is RFF - you will buy both.
Absolutely NOT. I would NEVER buy both. Why would I do that? Just because I now own a Nikon S2 and a Nikon SP and errr..two Bessa R2S's? :D
Goodyear
05-17-2006, 12:22
Absolutely NOT. I would NEVER buy both. Why would I do that? Just because I now own a Nikon S2 and a Nikon SP and errr..two Bessa R2S's? :D:D :D
That is the way of these things.
back alley
05-17-2006, 12:40
i like the idea of having the zi and the m3 (and the cl).
it works...
If you like the cosina cameras there is always the R2M or R3M. It comes with a lens for $1050, and you could always find someone interested in the lens and get a body for around $500...
Rich Silfver
05-17-2006, 13:00
If I had to pick between the two of them?
Leica M6
Why?
- Proven body,
- Proven re-sell value,
- Looks much better than the ZI (extremely subjective of course but this is if *I* had to pick)
the only "real" downside to the zeiss ikon is that it doesn't have the "leica feel". i'd happily give that up for the best viewfinder ever. i don't want to deal with the flare-prone rf patch and more high maintenance cloth shutter, either.
RObert Budding
05-17-2006, 16:07
I would DEFINITELY buy the M6!!!
BECAUSE:
1. IT IS LEICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !
2. I had VERY VERY bad experience with contax G2
3. ZI is overpriced BESSA R3A (I don't trust COSINA, BTW)
4. I don't want my camera to be dead without batteries. M6 works everywhere/everytime
5. Look carefully at the lever that opens the back door!!! Absolutly UNSAFE... You WILL loose your pictures because of it.
6. ZI shutter NOISE!!!
7. Are you still thinking? Run and buy M6
Regards...
You seem to have some misperceptions:
1. And your point is?
2. The Contax G2 was manufactured by Kyocera. Kyocera no longer manufactures cameras.
3. The ZI is not a Bessa R3A any more than a Nikon F100 is a Nikon N80.
4. I think the battery issue is silly. Batteries are small and light - it's easy to carry a spare. And electronic shutters are more accurate than mechanical shutters.
5. Most people have no issues whatsoever with the latch on the ZI. Are you catching the latch on your spiked jacket or something?
6. ZI shutter noise? Sheesh! All shutters make noise. My Bronica RF645 is probably quieter than a Leica. So what? The Leica is quiet enough (as is the ZI).
7. I bought neither. I like medium and large format negatives.
Enjoy your Leica (or ZI).
What Rich said. I use an M6TTL and its a terrific camera. The Zeiss is nice but the ergonomics and size of the M6 do it for me.
Bertram2
05-17-2006, 17:18
I would DEFINITELY buy the M6!!!
BECAUSE:
1. IT IS LEICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !
2. I had VERY VERY bad experience with contax G2
3. ZI is overpriced BESSA R3A (I don't trust COSINA, BTW)
4. I don't want my camera to be dead without batteries. M6 works everywhere/everytime
5. Look carefully at the lever that opens the back door!!! Absolutly UNSAFE... You WILL loose your pictures because of it.
6. ZI shutter NOISE!!!
7. Are you still thinking? Run and buy M6
Regards...
There are some good arguments for a M6TTL too, depending on the personal preferences tho.
None of them is in this list of Kinderkacke above, based all on hearsay. Enjoy your Leica, but if people ask for advice here , please don't talk about stuff you obviously have no clue off.
Bertram
BrianShaw
05-17-2006, 17:22
Put an end to this asinine bickering, George... buy BOTH... you're a "man of means"!
:) :cool: :D
Bertram2
05-17-2006, 17:23
5. Are you catching the latch on your spiked jacket or something?
).
Despicable !! But really nice !! :D :D :D
Bertram
Put an end to this asinine bickering, George... buy BOTH... you're a "man of means"!
:) :cool: :D
Brian,
So long as it remains on low simmer "bickering" I think we're okay. Folks have mainly kept it civil.
I have no desire to own both and am not of such "means" that I'd ever feel "good" doing so! Heck, if price were not an issue - I'd just buy a NIB M7!
I guess the real problem to me is that whether it is a ZI or M6 (or, for that matter a R2A or R2M etc.) what is going to be the VF configuration of the DM?
I read here a while ago of a 1.3x lens factor. So, what kind of framelines will the DM have?
With the SLRs the lens factor situation is much less of an issue because you can just extrapolate the effetive f/l (giving account for edge compression) and feel fairly confident since the lens view remains m/l WYSIWYG.
But with a RF you have to take into consideration not just what the sensor "sees" but what you see through the VF framelines. If you mount a 50mm Summicron on a DM it will "see" as a 65mm, I think. So what will be the frameline?
It is rather confusing.....
Tom Diaz
05-17-2006, 19:24
I've had an M6 TTL for a few years (so it is used) and I just got a brand new ZI. I would go for the used M6 TTL, but not by a country mile. (I assume prices would be about the same...?)
The M6 feels more solid and has a 30 year service commitment, etc. Also (although I think this factor can be exaggerated) there is still a lot to be said for a camera that has an all-mechanical shutter and can be used by a skilled photographer if there are no batteries in it.
If you're in the field a long way from home and it's your one and only, that's big.
Having said that, the ZI is a fantastic camera, based on just a month or so of use. Very smooth operation. Light but solid. It does have a fine viewfinder. The M6 TTL is of course compatible with virtually all Leica lenses ever made including my weird 135mm f/2.8 Elmarit with the "eyes." The ZI has a long rangefinder base and thus works fine with my Noctilux and other high speed or long lenses, but I don't think it'll work with those eyes.
Do you intend to use the camera for the next 10 to 20 years? I think Leica probably has the advantage. If you think cameras are more expendable and get replaced more often, the ZI might get the nod, especially if the price is greatly in its favor.
MinorTones
05-17-2006, 19:26
The only Leica I have is a IIIF, and I've only held the ZI in my hands for 3 minutes at a camera shop.
I'm going through a similar dilemma myself, leica or ZI, that Cameraquest deal is nice.
In the end I'm going to go with a Leica because its what I'm lusting after.
-Mitch
back alley
05-17-2006, 19:27
tom, what prompted you to get the zi instead of another m6?
.....Do you intend to use the camera for the next 10 to 20 years? I think Leica probably has the advantage. If you think cameras are more expendable and get replaced more often, the ZI might get the nod, especially if the price is greatly in its favor.
Tom,
All that you said is well-taken and I appreciate very much your thoughtful comments. As to the "excerpted" part above.
That is part of my dilemma.
The best way to answer this is that I still have and use (albeit only on occassion now) my Nikkormat FT-2 - my first 35mm camera purchased new back in 1980!
I have a pretty good feeling that I will still be shooting it long after I have "shelved" my D-70 as "woefully obsolete".
That said, since part of my "positioning" with a M-mount camera is to be prepared shoudl I want a Leica DM - I do intend that the film camera I choose be in it for the long run! :D
Maybe Joe can help out here since he has a ZI. Joe, is it a shooter that's good for 20 years or so?
back alley
05-17-2006, 19:50
Maybe Joe can help out here since he has a ZI. Joe, is it a shooter that's good for 20 years or so?
is the camera a 20 year shooter...or am i a 20 year shooter? ;)
honestly, i think it is.
but, i am careful with my gear and except for dropping the p i have never hurt a harmless camera.
i also think a simple solution is to have a back up like an m3 or cl. something mechanical and with the cl, something that has a meter.
all bases covered.
joe
BillBingham2
05-17-2006, 20:03
George,
I have a M6 (not TTL, first year of production) and love it. It's paired with a M4P. I also have way too many new Bessas (2Ts, 3Ls and my son has an R). I've just gone back to the light side (have an S2, looking for an SP).
I would say skip the ZI and the M6 and go with a Bessa R3A and spend the left over on glass. Get a 40/1.4 and a 25/4 (while you can). If you want to use 85/2 or 105/2.5, skip the R3A and go with a lower cost T. You can focus every Nikkor LTM made and use the money you save to fund a good zoom finder (nikon of course).
The T and the R3A support the lower cost winder, not as smooth as a rapidwinder but a lot of fun and very low cost.
You have plenty of film bodies, going M to get ready for Digital is not a bad idea. Buy glass, not bodies.
B2 (;->
You seem to have some misperceptions:
1. And your point is?
2. The Contax G2 was manufactured by Kyocera. Kyocera no longer manufactures cameras.
3. The ZI is not a Bessa R3A any more than a Nikon F100 is a Nikon N80.
4. I think the battery issue is silly. Batteries are small and light - it's easy to carry a spare. And electronic shutters are more accurate than mechanical shutters.
5. Most people have no issues whatsoever with the latch on the ZI. Are you catching the latch on your spiked jacket or something?
6. ZI shutter noise? Sheesh! All shutters make noise. My Bronica RF645 is probably quieter than a Leica. So what? The Leica is quiet enough (as is the ZI).
7. I bought neither. I like medium and large format negatives.
Enjoy your Leica (or ZI).
OK!
so,
1. Leica=experience=quality=history=reliability!!!
2. I expect ergonomic problems with ZI because it was mainly designed in JAPAN by COSINA. G2 was designed by Kyocera which is in Japan as well. These SECOND CLASS companies are not experienced enough to produce 1500USD cameras!!!
3.Really? Maybe they look different but mechanicaly they are 80% identical!
4.I'm quite satisfied with Ms shutter accuracy! All slides are well exposed.
5.one word ---->> ACCIDENT! I can throw my leica from 2 meters height and my film will be safe.
6.Yea BESSA-R is pretty quiet too. But when I use it people stare at me. I'm invisible with my LEICA M6
statements of leica's proven reliability are a bit misleading. hard, professional use has proven that its shutter is not as reliable as copal shutters and their clones. they also require yearly tune ups to maintain accuracy to within 1/3 stop, which is important with chromes, and is never as good as an electric copal. also, a fleck of film or grain of sand can easily jam the shutter and transport system in the field. what leicas are is durable. so, you end up with a camera that lasts longer, but needs more maintenance.
back alley
05-17-2006, 20:28
I'm invisible with my LEICA M6
i like that one the best!
There are some good arguments for a M6TTL too, depending on the personal preferences tho.
None of them is in this list of Kinderkacke above, based all on hearsay. Enjoy your Leica, but if people ask for advice here , please don't talk about stuff you obviously have no clue off.
Bertram
that's my choice! I cannot see any drawbacks in my M6... Kinderkache!
I'm invisible with my LEICA M6
i like that one the best!
Of course I understand that ASPALT, TREES, FLOWERS (and especially your friends) and etc don't afraid of you and your LOVER ZI... Enjoy it
back alley
05-17-2006, 20:37
Of course I understand that ASPALT, TREES, FLOWERS (and especially your friends) and etc don't afraid of you and your LOVER ZI... Enjoy it
could i get a translation on that?
joe
oh, great. another ninja.
I've actually fondled both the ZI and an M6. For that kind of investment I'd have to go with the Leica. IT"S A LEICA for god's sake. A Cobra might go as fast as a Ferari, but it's a Ferari. (I'm not going to open the BMW / Harley Davidson can of worms...)
If I could justify one, I'd buy an M6. I'd also buy a Ferari if I could afford one. Truth be told, I'm wedded to my (gasp) OM system gear. Period. The Rf collection is rather more like a mistress (several actualy...well more like a red neck cat house...) Great sex, but not a good cook or the mother of my children. Boorish analogy, but it makes my point. We're in the region of emotional decision.
OK!
so,
1. Leica=experience=quality=history=reliability!!!
2. I expect ergonomic problems with ZI because it was mainly designed in JAPAN by COSINA. G2 was designed by Kyocera which is in Japan as well. These SECOND CLASS companies are not experienced enough to produce 1500USD cameras!!!
3.Really? Maybe they look different but mechanicaly they are 80% identical!
4.I'm quite satisfied with Ms shutter accuracy! All slides are well exposed.
5.one word ---->> ACCIDENT! I can throw my leica from 2 meters height and my film will be safe.
6.Yea BESSA-R is pretty quiet too. But when I use it people stare at me. I'm invisible with my LEICA M6
ARS,
I'm betting that you are a really nice guy with a passion for your chosen gear.
I also notice that you have about 7 posts here.
So I am guessing that you do not know about the near death match threads that went on here back in November of last year through around February.
Suffice to say, it was Zeiss vs. Leica on bodies and ZF vs Nikkor lenses etc. It was damned ugly and it is why in my post today I asked people to keep it "civil".
And most folks are doing so.
I accept your "passion" for Leica and am glad you are pleased with your "kit".
However, there are other points of view. I myself own two Cosina/Bessa etc. camera bodies (R2S) and several S-mount pieces of CV glass.
If I were king of the world, I would take over Nikon and make them produce a digital S-mount RF (the SPD! ;) ) and know that I could continue to enjoy my S-mount glass in a digiRF.
But, alas, I am NOT king of the world - at least not yet.
You have every right to tout the Leica gear - it is probably the single most used gear here and needs no one to "defend" it.
But please lay off bad mouthing the Cosina gear because I have some already and think they have identified very viable price points for various levels of quality.
i have a feeling that most people here consider rangefinder cameras to be their, uh, wives...not just a fling on the side.
grantray
05-17-2006, 20:56
Designed in Germany by Zeiss, built by Cosina. Do your homework. And unless you've worked executive level in small-batch manufacturing, like I have, please try to base the remainder of your comments on fact and accute personal physical observation. And since you swear Leica, whom I greatly respect as one of the pioneers of portable photography, dont forget who originally engineered ASPH lens design. As a hint, that company built the first lenses to go to the moon with NASA.
-grant
Huck Finn
05-17-2006, 21:20
OK!
so,
1. Leica=experience=quality=history=reliability!!!
2. I expect ergonomic problems with ZI because it was mainly designed in JAPAN by COSINA. G2 was designed by Kyocera which is in Japan as well. These SECOND CLASS companies are not experienced enough to produce 1500USD cameras!!!
3.Really? Maybe they look different but mechanicaly they are 80% identical!
4.I'm quite satisfied with Ms shutter accuracy! All slides are well exposed.
5.one word ---->> ACCIDENT! I can throw my leica from 2 meters height and my film will be safe.
6.Yea BESSA-R is pretty quiet too. But when I use it people stare at me. I'm invisible with my LEICA M6
1. So what has Leica done with all of that experience & history? Basically they have been making the same camera since 1953 with a few tweaks. They tried to use their experience to improve the camera when they introduced the M5, but the public wasn't buying, so you're not buying a camera based on oodles of experience. You're buying the same basic design that they came up with over 50 years ago.
Oh, they did change a few things. They cheapened the rangefinder when they went from the M3 to the M2 & have been trying to figure out how to control flare with the newer RF design ever since. This has been a problem with the M6 in particular. Erwin Puts has pointed out that the ZI rangefinder is very similar to the superior design of that on the M3. Nor did their experience prevent them from producing an M7 with numerous complaints about poor seals around the eyepiece that resulted in dust in the viewfinder.
2. What you expect in terms or problems with ergonomics has nothing to do with reality. It has to do totally with what's in your mind. There are plenty of actual users of Zeiss Ikons on this forum & the reality is that they love its ergonomics. On what do you base your comment that the ZI "was mainly designed in Japan"?
3. What mechanics in the ZI & the R2A are "80% identical"? The rangefinders on the 2 cameras are different. The viewfinders are different. The shutters are electronic, not mechanical, and the electronic controls of the two shutters are different. Let's look at what makes a difference in taking pictures. The ZI is the only camera that can match a Leica M in immediacy of response. Shutter lag is 14 ms in manual & 20 ms in AE. By comparison the M6 is 12 ms & the M7 is 25 ms. A Bessa camera is about 100 ms. If you're interested in capturing the "decisive moment", this kind of performance will make a difference in the pictures you take. The ZI is a big upgrade over the R2A.
4. The fact that you are satisfied with your shutter accuracy doesn't change the fact that the battery issue is silly, nor does it change the fact that electronic shutters are more accurate.
5. The latch on the ZI is not flimsy. It is a proven design feature that has been around for 20 years on Rollei cameras such as the SL66, the 2000, & the 3003. Anyone's film will be safe in a ZI; it's quite sturdy. Regardless, please don't throw your Leica or any other camera from 2 meters height.
6. A Leica M is relatively quiet, but it certainly doesn't make you invisible. And unless you're a spy, what difference does it make? Rather than sneaking up on people, engage them a little & it won't even be an issue. At speeds below 1/30, the Leica actually becomes noisier than the ZI due to the excapement that controls the timing. There are cameras today that are virtually silent, but the M6 isn't one of them. This shutter noise thing is greatly overrated in my opinion.
The M6 is a great camera. Comparison with the ZI really comes down to whether someone wants a mechanical, all-manual camera or an electronic camera with AE. There is also the issue of whether one prefers to buy new or used. There are other differences between the two, but none of them will prevent a user from taking great pictures with either one. Or lousy ones depending on skill level. ;)
1. Leica=experience=quality=history=reliability!!!
The ='s don't add up.
2. I expect ergonomic problems with ZI because it was mainly designed in JAPAN by COSINA. G2 was designed by Kyocera which is in Japan as well. These SECOND CLASS companies are not experienced enough to produce 1500USD cameras!!!
Canon and Nikon are also Japanese. Must be 2nd class as well.
3.Really? Maybe they look different but mechanicaly they are 80% identical!
Chimpansees are 98% like us. Yet, no-one would say they're the same. VW and Seat are also 80%+ the same, yet I don't see a VW owner say he's driving a Seat.
5.one word ---->> ACCIDENT! I can throw my leica from 2 meters height and my film will be safe.
Get yourself a Luigi case and strap.
6.Yea BESSA-R is pretty quiet too. But when I use it people stare at me. I'm invisible with my LEICA M6
My M2 never made me invisible. With my Bessa R, though, I can shoot whatever I like. Invisibility is an attitude. Your M is not a cloaking device.
Cobra, or Ferrari...? Ferrari is style but Cobra is brute force. I guess I'd opt for the Cobra, the original one. :p
I've actually fondled both the ZI and an M6. For that kind of investment I'd have to go with the Leica. IT"S A LEICA for god's sake. A Cobra might go as fast as a Ferari, but it's a Ferari. (I'm not going to open the BMW / Harley Davidson can of worms...)
If I could justify one, I'd buy an M6. I'd also buy a Ferari if I could afford one. Truth be told, I'm wedded to my (gasp) OM system gear. Period. The Rf collection is rather more like a mistress (several actualy...well more like a red neck cat house...) Great sex, but not a good cook or the mother of my children. Boorish analogy, but it makes my point. We're in the region of emotional decision.
The last time I saw a Ferrari 456GT, my friend was with me and I told him, we just save ourself $2m HKD for walking and not owning a 456 for the last 8 years.
They cost $2.6m HKD new back in 1997, now you can pick one up for $600k HKD.
1. So what has Leica done with all of that experience & history? Basically they have been making the same camera since 1953 with a few tweaks. They tried to use their experience to improve the camera when they introduced the M5, but the public wasn't buying, so you're not buying a camera based on oodles of experience. You're buying the same basic design that they came up with over 50 years ago.
Oh, they did change a few things. They cheapened the rangefinder when they went from the M3 to the M2 & have been trying to figure out how to control flare with the newer RF design ever since. This has been a problem with the M6 in particular. Erwin Puts has pointed out that the ZI rangefinder is very similar to the superior design of that on the M3. Nor did their experience prevent them from producing an M7 with numerous complaints about poor seals around the eyepiece that resulted in dust in the viewfinder.
3. What mechanics in the ZI & the R2A are "80% identical"? The rangefinders on the 2 cameras are different. The viewfinders are different. The shutters are electronic, not mechanical, and the electronic controls of the two shutters are different. Let's look at what makes a difference in taking pictures. The ZI is the only camera that can match a Leica M in immediacy of response. Shutter lag is 14 ms in manual & 20 ms in AE. By comparison the M6 is 12 ms & the M7 is 25 ms. A Bessa camera is about 100 ms. If you're interested in capturing the "decisive moment", this kind of performance will make a difference in the pictures you take. The ZI is a big upgrade over the R2A.
Huck,
1. Sounds interesting, would like to know more, please tell us more regarding the ZI's RF (charts?).
3. AE or no AE is not important to me, I use manual setting only but will the electronic shutter last as good as the M6's manual shutter?
BrianPhotog
05-18-2006, 00:03
OK!
so,
1. Leica=experience=quality=history=reliability!!!
2. I expect ergonomic problems with ZI because it was mainly designed in JAPAN by COSINA. G2 was designed by Kyocera which is in Japan as well. These SECOND CLASS companies are not experienced enough to produce 1500USD cameras!!!
3.Really? Maybe they look different but mechanicaly they are 80% identical!
4.I'm quite satisfied with Ms shutter accuracy! All slides are well exposed.
5.one word ---->> ACCIDENT! I can throw my leica from 2 meters height and my film will be safe.
6.Yea BESSA-R is pretty quiet too. But when I use it people stare at me. I'm invisible with my LEICA M6
And this is the point in which passion over something leads to false statements about that thing in an effort to "prove" that things "superiority" and perhaps justify your monetary investment in that thing or at least your perceived "face value" in owning that thing.
Unfortunately for you, this is a forum made up of rangefinder enthusiasts, many of which actually know about the kit they use and will take you to task on any false statements that you make in your rush to defend an illogical passion over an object.
Like...
ZI designs come from ZI. QA for the Zeiss Ikon is imported, too. That is where much of the cost comes from.
Next time you get down to the photo shop, take a look through the viewfinder...when your fellow Leicaphiles aren't looking of course. Do a side-by-side with the M6. I have, and have found the ZI viewfinder a more comfortable experience. Maybe it's because I wear glasses?
On shutter construction, besides the benefit of more speed, copal shutters are more durable then cloth. Cloth may be quieter, but I like to take lost of pics so I'll go with copal. Besides, if you're taking pics you still have to hold the camera in your hand regardless of how quiet the shutter is. If you need *that* level of silence, don't you think that someone will notice you walking around a long time before you take a picture? I take shots with my R2 and R2a in local temples all the time. If it's quiet enough for that, what more is needed?
The finder is simply amazing on the ZI. I don't own an M6, but I own an M2 and it simply gathers dust since I picked up the ZI. The handling, the feel, the ergonomics, the finder... its a great camera. You can't go wrong with either, however.
For those talking about the resale value, I buy my cameras to use, not as an investment. Just my $0.02...
Just go buy a one of them, then take a trip to africa! You will be emotionally attached to the camera after shooting it in a different part of the world.
Why not let you experiences with the camera build the emotional attachment?
A good idea, but for Africa I would substitute another continent. Africa is of course the Mecca for wildlife photographers, and I personally would not recommend a RF for that. (having used Leica M's with and without Visoflex in Kenya, South Africa and Zimbabwe.)
thanatos
05-18-2006, 00:56
There's far more to Africa than Wildlife, Jaap. Africa is a big place.
BTW, the latest UK "Amateur Photographer" mag (20th May issue) reviewed the ZI and found a few problems with it like the exposure meter being invisible in the viewfinder in bright conditions and a metering interval of 1-stop in spite of an aperture interval of 1/3-stop leading to "a lot of wasted film". I've no axe to grind here but I think that this review would enter my decision-making process when I was having a fondle.
True- I've been in the contintinent for six weeks a year for over 15 years now. Yes it is a big place. I've flown over large tracts of it but there is still a lot to see. But most tourists (especially from the USA as holidays tend to be shorter over there) tend to fly in for a week in Botswana or South Africa for "the big Five".That means a hunking big DSLR. :eek: To get into RF type photography one needs to become a traveller as opposed to a tourist, especially in a continent like Africa that needs to be discovered. I somehow feel that for instance South East Asia is more of a first choice for a RF.
telenous
05-18-2006, 01:28
About the resale value: The resale value is a genuine concern. We all (?) buy our cameras to use them, not to sell them back and make a profit, but it is nice to know that if you decide to part company with it for whatever reason, you will recapture a healthy percentage of what you paid.
About battery dependence/independence: I appreciate the point of view of users who are comfortable with their cameras being fully electronic. As I am sure they do (or should do) when some of us like their mechanical cameras because they are not electronic.
RObert Budding
05-18-2006, 01:43
Despicable !! But really nice !! :D :D :D
Bertram
It was a joke - I hope no one take offense. Or that not too many people take offense (I don't want to be ba.nned for life).
There are good reasons for someone to prefer one camera over another. I just don't like people to justify their positions with "facts" that aren't.
I'd have no issue with people who buy a Leica because:
- It's a chick magnet.
- The designer versions match my belts and shoes.
- I love the build quality.
- I can afford one, so why not?
- I'm trying to pump money into Leica to keep them afloat (oh, never mind, no one here buys new).
- It makes me smile when I hold it (remember Woody Allen in "Sleeper" with the Orgasmatron?)
To cast aspersions on another product to justify your own purchase does not cut it - particularly when so many of the "facts" were just flat out wrong.
Anyway, my guess is that most people could make stunning images with either camera . Or bad images with either camera. Perhaps we should have a double blind test: identical images shot with a Leica and a ZI with the same lens. Then people could try to match the photo with the camera.
Go make photos! Enough of this!
RObert Budding
05-18-2006, 01:50
The M6 is a nice camera. Enjoy it!
Actually Leica welcomes the existence of lower-priced competitors. They figure, the more customers are attracted to the RF market, the more gear they'll sell in the long run. So just start of with a ZI,buy a collapsible Elmar, buy a M3, buy a 35 lux asph, buy a M4-2, buy a Noctilux, buy a M7, buy a M8, etc etc... :D
This is the kind of post I like: it gives facts & it clearly comes from somebody who knows that if somebody is buying an M mount RF camera, hype is the last of his decision criteria.
1. So what has Leica done with all of that experience & history? Basically they have been making the same camera since 1953 with a few tweaks. They tried to use their experience to improve the camera when they introduced the M5, but the public wasn't buying, so you're not buying a camera based on oodles of experience. You're buying the same basic design that they came up with over 50 years ago.
Oh, they did change a few things. They cheapened the rangefinder when they went from the M3 to the M2 & have been trying to figure out how to control flare with the newer RF design ever since. This has been a problem with the M6 in particular. Erwin Puts has pointed out that the ZI rangefinder is very similar to the superior design of that on the M3. Nor did their experience prevent them from producing an M7 with numerous complaints about poor seals around the eyepiece that resulted in dust in the viewfinder.
I find the history of Leica really interesting. Having fondled only a few (so my knowledge is mainly theoretical instead of real-life) it seems to me like they designed the ideal camera, then had to compromise on it for various reasons. Cost being the main one in the long run, implementing features into a body that wasn't built for it more recently. Sometimes it is a better idea to start from scratch, but I doubt Leica now has the financial possibility to do that.
2. What you expect in terms or problems with ergonomics has nothing to do with reality. It has to do totally with what's in your mind. There are plenty of actual users of Zeiss Ikons on this forum & the reality is that they love its ergonomics. On what do you base your comment that the ZI "was mainly designed in Japan"?
And anyway, as if Japanese designs are bad by definition. Look at the Olympus OM range. Superb ergonomics, very sturdy and durable and some lenses match Leica's.
4. The fact that you are satisfied with your shutter accuracy doesn't change the fact that the battery issue is silly, nor does it change the fact that electronic shutters are more accurate.
I went above the polar circle with a battery dependent camera and took the same one to mushy Japan. No problems. Of course.
6. A Leica M is relatively quiet, but it certainly doesn't make you invisible. And unless you're a spy, what difference does it make? Rather than sneaking up on people, engage them a little & it won't even be an issue.
Photographing in temples was a nice example. Engaging in people will build an atmosphere where photography isn't something "forbidden" that should be "hidden". Even wedding photographers use cameras that are way louder than either of these two under discussion. It's not an issue, because everybody knows what's happening.
Peter.
A good idea, but for Africa I would substitute another continent. Africa is of course the Mecca for wildlife photographers, and I personally would not recommend a RF for that. (having used Leica M's with and without Visoflex in Kenya, South Africa and Zimbabwe.)
Viso-pain... hahahaha
Saw a young guy (at my age :D ) with a black M (no idea which one) with a Viso 3 a few days ago.
After I my current business workout, I might just take a trip somewhere in asia, nothing fancy, just somewhere to relax and lay back...
Maybe I should go to Thailand?
In January I had the choice of a brand new Zeiss Ikon for about £950 (UK) or a brand new (sealed in box) Leica M6 TTL for £1000 with a renewed 2 year passport from Leica UK from an official Leica dealer.
I opted for the M6 TTL. Not regretted this decision. I had an almost new Elmar-M 50mm on it (until this week) but now have a 40mm f/1.4 Nokton-Classic on it. Nice combo. Looks and feels right.
Good Reference.
About the resale value: The resale value is a genuine concern. We all (?) buy our cameras to use them, not to sell them back and make a profit, but it is nice to know that if you decide to part company with it for whatever reason, you will recapture a healthy percentage of what you paid.
Ain't that the turth!
It wasn't that bad at all, in retrospect, though it got me into SLR pretty fast. I'm seriously considering though, when (oh when) the M8 appears to experiment with the Visoflex again, provided, of course, that it will fit.
Bertram2
05-18-2006, 03:10
Do you intend to use the camera for the next 10 to 20 years? I think Leica probably has the advantage. If you think cameras are more expendable and get replaced more often, the ZI might get the nod, especially if the price is greatly in its favor.
I have read this expectation quite often when it comes to the ZI, I mean the silent assumption that a ZI does not last as long as a Leica.
There are no facts which would justify that assumption tho. Especially all those who shoot a roll or two per month or have it on the shelf only anyway , just fo talking about it , will have no probs .
But even when it comes to the professional use of a ZI , nothing indicates it could break easier than a Leica. Why should it ? Because it hasn't got that old fashioned heavy brass body ? And Leicas break too, more often as one should assume btw.
If somebody still wants to have spareparts in 2035 he should take the Leica indeed, I doubt tho that they can fullfill their promise.
My ZI will be written off with 100% ( the third time !) in 2035, I'll buy me a new one then , from the € 2000 gap; which have slept with an interest rate of 8% for 30 years. 20.125,- Euro should bee enuff to get a decent new camera then.
I know, it's no use to calculate this way, some people simply love to have things which are promised to be undestroyable and to last for ever. Maybe this is , as HCB said, simply a compensation for all the uncertainties in there life ?
Well, if it helps, why not ? But if they notice one day, that they begin to talk to "her", then something's gotten off rail, time for the doc then. :D
bertram
The ZI is a nice Acura NSX to the M6's Porsche 911 turbo.
Huck Finn
05-18-2006, 05:11
BTW, the latest UK "Amateur Photographer" mag (20th May issue) reviewed the ZI and found a few problems with it like the exposure meter being invisible in bright conditions and a metering interval of 1-stop in spite of an aperture interval of 1/3-stop leading to "a lot of wasted film". I've no axe to grind here but I think that this review would enter my decision-making process when I was having a fondle.
Actually, this comment about 1-stop metering is not true - although it appears to be the case on first look. It's true that the meter only reports shutter speeds in one stop intervals. However, when used with a ZM lens, the aperture setting can be set in 3 different positions before the meter changes. The middle position is what the meter recommends. The other 2 positions are +/- 1/3 stop. While it would be nice if Zeiss provided this information in the viewfinder, the fact of the matter is that the information is available.
The shutter speeds are really no different than a Leica which also has shutter speed adjustments only in full stops. The difference is actually in favor of the ZI because aperture settings are available in 1/3 stops while Leica lenses can only be set in half stop intervals.
BTW, when conditions are bright enough to make the shutter speed numbers disappear from the viewfinder, I'm not using the meter. I'm either using AE with exposure compensation, AE-lock, or pre-setting manually with readings that are not taken by metering directly into the sun or other bright light source.
grantray
05-18-2006, 05:34
The ZI is a nice Acura NSX to the M6's Porsche 911 turbo.
I didn't know the NSX was designed in Germany. Also, I believe all modern Porsches are controlled by electronic fuel injection. I suppose owners are forced to take that into consideration before going any long road trips..
BillBingham2
05-18-2006, 05:42
Look at what his real needs are, he wants to start getting M mount glass for a move to digital. I do not think he wants yet another film body, my guess is he would rather buy a digital M or ZI (or even a RD1 perhaps) at some point not too far down the road. He has his classic (film) system done, it's Nikon and Bessa.
Go with a used R2 or a new T and get some new glass. If you go with the T, you can get some way cool Nikkors for her (the 85, 105 and 135) and she will focus them all FINE!!!
B2 (;->
I didn't know the NSX was designed in Germany. Also, I believe all modern Porsches are controlled by electronic fuel injection. I suppose owners are forced to take that into consideration before going any long road trips..
And it would probably be advisable to carry a spare battery too! ;)
Huck Finn
05-18-2006, 05:52
Huck,
1. Sounds interesting, would like to know more, please tell us more regarding the ZI's RF (charts?).
Will,
I became interested in this subject of rangefinder design when I read the Erwin Puts review of the ZI, which can be found here:
www.imx.nl/photosite/comments/c021.html
It includes a diagram of the ZI rangefinder, which is also available in the downloadable brochure at www.zeissikon.com/downloads.htm.
Erwin provides more information on his website. An article with charts is called "Rangefinder from M3 to M7" & can be found in his Engineering section. Here is the link:
www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/technics/RFbasics/rfissues.html
There is also good information in his article "Choosing M Cameras" in the Leica M section. Here is the link:
www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/mseries/choosem.html
Other information which I have obtained on the subject comes from reading old reviews at a nearby library of the CL from Modern Photography & from Popular Photography, from searching the web for diagrams of the Bessa rangefinder, & from personal correspondence with the Zeiss engineering department. Cosina's Korean website has excellent rangefinder diagrams. Here is the link:
www.cosina.co.kr/category_camera/bessa_r.html
The bottom line is that what the ZI & the M3 have in common is that the framelines are located directly behind the illumination window. The rangefinder design of the M2 & later Leicas as well as the Hexar RF locate the framelines at an angled position in relation to the illumination window, thereby introducing rangefinder parallax and flare. Since the ZI & M3 use direct light and do not depend on reflected light, they are also brighter.
Huck
BrianShaw
05-18-2006, 05:55
I'd have no issue with people who buy a Leica because:
- It's a chick magnet.
It is? Every time I've worn a Leica my wife asks when if I'm also going to wear Bermuda shorts, white sox, and black penny-loafers.
But if I wear a Hasselblad... she exclaims: "Humma-humma... WOW... that's a big one!" She's even impressed with a Nikon F-3, but only if the motordrive is attached. Who said rangefinders rule? :D
I didn't know the NSX was designed in Germany. Also, I believe all modern Porsches are controlled by electronic fuel injection. I suppose owners are forced to take that into consideration before going any long road trips..
I don't care where the camera was designed..
I should have said the ZI is the Corvette Z06, the M6 is the 911 Turbo.. That's a much more accurate metaphor.
willie_901
05-18-2006, 06:07
About two months ago I faced the exact same decision. There was a very nice M6 with a Leitz 35/2 for sale at a local camera store. At the same time I researched the ZI, also with a 35/2.
Both cameras were the same price +/- $100.
I decided on the ZI for two reasons. I did not want a used camera. I was not willing to buy a new Leica. Second, I preferred the lighter weight and more accurate shutter of the ZI.
I carry the camera with me everywhere. I do not regret my decision. In three-five years I may sing a different tune if the ZI does not stand up to heavy use.
The ZI is not a Leica. It was not meant to be a Leica. At the same time the ZI is not a Bessa. A Bessa is not meant to be a ZI. Each of these three cameras has it's market niche. People buy the camera that meets their needs – needs like budget , resale value, manufacturing tolerance and robustness.
I am very impressed with the ZI. The finder is spectacular. Focusing is a breeze. I did not think I would like the light meter (I prefer spot meters). I found the light meter is easy to learn and works very well. The exposure compensation combined with an easy to use exposure lock system changed my mind. In bright light I think the M6 light meter is easier to read than the ZI.
The M6 shutter is quieter, but not by much At the same time the M6 shutter requires maintenance and is less accurate (but it does not need a battery).
I like the ZI so much I am starting to think about selling my Nikon F3 SLR/ Nikkor lenes system in order to finance a second Zeiss M lens and a Bessa L with 21 or 24 mm lens.
In the end, you will be happy with either camera. I think this thread conatins all the relevant informantion you need. It's great people here share their experience and knowledge.
Good luck with your decision.
willie
ps Criticism of the latch is simply misinformation. The latch is secure and the latch mechanism does not feel cheap in any way.
back alley
05-18-2006, 06:49
i think the latch complaint is actually kinda funny.
i'm a bit of a klutz and i find the latch needs to be looked at to open it. i still don't have that 'slide it to the side and then down' thing yet.
for it to open on it's own is just a joke, never gonna happen.
grantray
05-18-2006, 06:50
I don't care where the camera was designed..
I should have said the ZI is the Corvette Z06, the M6 is the 911 Turbo.. That's a much more accurate metaphor.
You're STILL off. Porsche outsources, ala Zeiss, far more of their production components, (which is very smart business), than GM does with the Corvette. Which is another reason why poor Lutz is swimming in the red while Porsche are laughing to the bank.
If Zeiss produced the ZI and all lenses "in house" the system would cost every bit as much as a Leica. I'm afraid your analogy is the RF equivalent of Chevy vs. Ford.
Will,
I became interested in this subject of rangefinder design when I read the Erwin Puts review of the ZI, which can be found here:
Dear Huck,
Thanks a lot for the info. The ZI just became more interesting to me.
I always consider a M3 or M6 0.85 for my next body (when $ allow) due to their long effective base lenght (got some GAS on a IIIG resently, but it's gone. :D ), M6 0.85 is expensive, but M3 are plentiful in Hong Kong.
A M3 vs ZI comparsion is just as unfair as a M6 vs ZI comparsion, but at the end, I would say a M3, for me. I don't need a new camera or AE, but I need a very good, used camera with long EBL. Then again, both of them don't have the 75mm frame line for the 75mm lux (again, I would buy used) and worst, I am broke :D
Anyway, thanks a lot for the info on the rangefinder, here is the information on the Kiev & Contax RF that I hope you find it interesting:
http://www3.telus.net/public/rpnchbck/rangefinder%20operation.html
Will
You're STILL off. Porsche outsources, ala Zeiss, far more of their production components, (which is very smart business), than GM does with the Corvette. Which is another reason why poor Lutz is swimming in the red while Porsche are laughing to the bank.
If Zeiss produced the ZI and all lenses "in house" the system would cost every bit as much as a Leica. I'm afraid your analogy is the RF equivalent of Chevy vs. Ford.
Guy, your knowledge of the auto industry is impressive(however incorrect your summarization of GM's problems may be, but let's not go off on a tangent here eh?), However I'm saying that the ZI is a very capable camera, right up there with the M6, but it lacks the "romance" that comes with the Leica brand. Just like the Z06 vs 911 turbo.
back alley
05-18-2006, 06:59
lacks romance?
just what kind of a relationship with your camera are we talking about here?
;)
lacks romance?
just what kind of a relationship with your camera are we talking about here?
;)
The one of the camera kind.
The ZI is not a Leica. It was not meant to be a Leica. At the same time the ZI is not a Bessa. A Bessa is not meant to be a ZI. Each of these three cameras has it's market niche. People buy the camera that meets their needs – needs like budget , resale value, manufacturing tolerance and robustness.
Currently the ZI's main rival is the used M6. It's a bit sad in some way, but if it is what they need to get in and stay in the market, then why not?
Brian: Get yourself some SL66 gear, preferrably with at least the Sonnar 150. We'll see you less frequently around here, but your wife will be humming all day.
BTW, does she have a sister?
amateriat
05-18-2006, 08:28
Why compare ZI to M6? The camera is just a lightproof box that holds the film. Why not do a ZI vs M6 vs (3)R3As comparison? I'm guessing that you really want a camera that you can feel emotionally attached to. For me, that is the M6. Simply for its looks - The ZI is ugly next to the Leica.
Ugly? Ouch, that's a bit harsh, methinks. I think the ZI is quite handsome, for what that's worth.
Of course, there's a bit of a bias here: the square-shouldered contours of the ZI are quite similar to my beloved Konica Hexars, which is yet another reason why I've taken a more than casual interest in this Ikon, since I've been thinking off-and-on about a non-motorized third body to use alongside my HRFs. Besides the body shape, the ZI has a somewhat-similar control layout, swing-open back, vertical-traveling shutter (with higher flash-sync speed), and AE operration, to the HRF. I can easily live without 135mm framelines, and while I have a wee bit of concern about using my 90 M-Hex with the ZI's 85mm framelines, I think (hope!) I can cope. I would hope the shutter noise isn't significantly louder than your garden-variety Leica M, so I'll have to compare side-by-side on that issue (too high a pitch would be a deal-breaker).
Emotional attachment? Well, that counts for something, but it can be subjective: I love the feel of a Leica M, but I've "bonded" with my HRFs as well, and don't doubt that I'd feel pretty much the same about the ZI. But this comes with time – the rest is just the first blush of infatuation. ;)
- Barrett
Huck Finn
05-18-2006, 08:49
I have a wee bit of concern about using my 90 M-Hex with the ZI's 85mm framelines, I think (hope!) I can cope. I would hope the shutter noise isn't significantly louder than your garden-variety Leica M, so I'll have to compare side-by-side on that issue (too high a pitch would be a deal-breaker).
- Barrett
Barrett,
You should have no trouble using the 85 frame lines with your 90 Hexanon-M. As part of their review of the Zeiss Ikon in the April issue of Shutterbug, Roger Hicks & Frances Schultz did a comparison of frame lines. They found the ZI 85 to be identical in size to the 90 frame lines of the Leica MP and that the M2 & the Bessa R2 both have wider 90 frame lines than the ZI 85!
In regard to the noise issue, some folks have found that the sound can be muffled with use of a Luigi case or a cheaper substitute case.
Huck
RObert Budding
05-18-2006, 09:02
I'm invisible with my LEICA M6
i like that one the best!
Must be the built-in Leica cloaking device.
Interesting and very informative discussion. I too was contemplating between a used M6 and a new non-Leica rangefinder. For me, at the time, it was a decision between the M6, the Bessa R2A, the Z1 and the Rollei RF.
The R2A and Z1 dropped off pretty quickly due to the fact that they are battery dependent. That was a big one for me. I’ve been there in the past, where I picked up my camera for a “decisive moment” to find the battery was dead. Even if you have a spare taped directly to the camera, by the time you take the old one out and put the new one it, the “moment” is gone. I wanted, needed, a camera that would still shoot if the battery was dead or weak.
Thus, it came down to the M6 and Rollei. Just entering the rangefinder world, I did what research I could (with some research done at this forum and the helpful comments by the members here) and was vexed. It finally came down to price. While I didn’t (and still don’t) have experience on rangefinders, I do know a little about lenses and I liked what I heard and read about the Rollei Sonar lenses. I could get the Rollei kit, body and the Sonnar 2.8 lens for $999. With more digging, I may have been able to find the M6 with a compatible lens for around the same, but I was having no luck. So, I chose new over used. So far, I have been very happy with the camera and lens. And, if I am pulled into the rangefinder world as many have been, I may look at a Leica down the road, simply to say that I own a Leica. Until then, the “box” I purchased gives me the results I want.
Good luck with your decision and purchase!
amateriat
05-18-2006, 09:45
Keith,
Hey, thanks for the offer. I work in east midtown (Lex and 50th) so normally would have to "beg off". But I might be able to steal a long lunch hour one day early next week. I'll PM you if it looks possible.
Make that three of us – give me an early enough heads-up and I can hop on the bike or F train from Brooklyn and meet y'all (and I'll finally have some motivation to visit PV...haven't gotten there yet, amazingly).
- Barrett
Benjamin Marks
05-18-2006, 09:49
they also require yearly tune ups to maintain accuracy to within 1/3 stop . . . what leicas are is durable. so, you end up with a camera that lasts longer, but needs more maintenance.
Not in my experience. I currently own M2, M3 (2), M6, M6TTL and M7 (sold an M-4P). Only the M7 was bought new. So these are some seriously old cameras. I have owned the M6 since 1994 and had it cla'd once when the meter died. I have had the M3s CLA'd once since 1992 and the M2 CLA'd plus shutter brake adjusted once. CLA your M annually if you want to. IMHO it's a waste of money.
Not in my experience. I currently own M2, M3 (2), M6, M6TTL and M7 (sold an M-4P). Only the M7 was bought new. So these are some seriously old cameras. I have owned the M6 since 1994 and had it cla'd once when the meter died. I have had the M3s CLA'd once since 1992 and the M2 CLA'd plus shutter brake adjusted once. CLA your M annually if you want to. IMHO it's a waste of money.
I agree 100% My experience as well. I had my M3 CLA'd , probably after 25 years since the last time, and the times turned out to be within 1/2 a stop. The whole shutter accuracy "issue" is moot anyway, I have never heard of any complaints about te Leica's being "less accurate" than the ZI or cloth shutters being worse than metal ones. The variation in film, development and even temperature when exposing easily absorb these perceived differences which can only be shown under laboratory conditions anyway, as will the light loss in the various lenses (the f-stops are mathematical values and don't take the transmission loss into account, except with TTL measuring of course) Just to ban another myth that has not turned up in this thread yet: Cloth burns slower than thin titanium when exposed to longer periods of concentrated sunlight; there is no advantage in having a metal shutter when you leave your camera in the direct sun in such a way as to burn little holes in your shutter. As for the number of exposures, both Leica and ZI shutters will easily withstand over 100.000 actuations.
BrianShaw
05-18-2006, 10:09
Brian: Get yourself some SL66 gear, preferrably with at least the Sonnar 150. We'll see you less frequently around here, but your wife will be humming all day.
BTW, does she have a sister?
Yup... Sonnar 150 gets her going, even on a Hassy... but you should see her when it has the lens hood attached. OUT OF CONTROL!
Sorry, but she's one of a kind... and she's mine!
amateriat
05-18-2006, 10:55
I've actually fondled both the ZI and an M6. For that kind of investment I'd have to go with the Leica. IT"S A LEICA for god's sake. A Cobra might go as fast as a Ferari, but it's a Ferari. (I'm not going to open the BMW / Harley Davidson can of worms...)
So you had to drag Enzo and Carroll into this. You're in trouble, lad (though I prefer John Cooper's work to either, so there). ;)
If I could justify one, I'd buy an M6. I'd also buy a Ferari if I could afford one. Truth be told, I'm wedded to my (gasp) OM system gear. Period. The Rf collection is rather more like a mistress (several actualy...well more like a red neck cat house...) Great sex, but not a good cook or the mother of my children. Boorish analogy, but it makes my point. We're in the region of emotional decision.
Er...forget about Enzo and Carroll...! :rolleyes:
- Barrett (who was going to quote an Ian Tyson song, but thought better)
willie_901
05-18-2006, 20:00
The R2A and Z1 dropped off pretty quickly due to the fact that they are battery dependent. That was a big one for me. I’ve been there in the past, where I picked up my camera for a “decisive moment” to find the battery was dead. Even if you have a spare taped directly to the camera, by the time you take the old one out and put the new one it, the “moment” is gone. I wanted, needed, a camera that would still shoot if the battery was dead or weak.
This is an excellent point.
I've decided to automatically send myself an email every four months to replace the batteries in all my cameras. That way I'll greatly reduce the likelihood that one of them suffers sudden battery loss. The used batteries will become emergency spares.
willie
I must be the only one who's never had a problem with a dead battery in a camera. Cell phone, yes, but not camera, not even digital -- the only thing that's made me miss the "decisive moment" was either not having the camera on hand, or taking the time to enjoy the moment without taking a picture (not every decisive moment has to be photographed, I know I speak blasphemy!). *shrug*
Barrett: I have the ZI, and I don't think it's a very pretty camera at all. But I do enjoy using that nimble machine, and the case hides it a bit :)
Huck: I haven't notice a difference in ZI's loudness of shutter sound with vs without the luigi case. Maybe I'll give it a shot just for laughs, but only after I burn through the current roll that's in it.
hasta la pasta,
Jano
Ugly or not, it does remind me a lot of the Contaxes and Kievs.
Battery dependency... hogwash. We have more battery dependent gadgets on our body than we care to remember. Do they fail when we need them the most? Only when you're ignorant of the fact the batteries need recharging/replacing now and then. Same with cameras. In all my years of using battery dependent cameras I've had not once had a problem. You notice the battery go empty long before it really stop functioning. And the indicator on my R-D1 works flawlessly. It shows up, I replace the battery with a fresh one. As soon as I get home, the empty battery goes into the charger. Next morning, I take it out and put it back in my pocket/bag. Missing a decisive moment? I miss more while I sleep. I can't be bothered by it. You miss them when you have to slam in a new film, don't you? And you do that more often than replacing a battery, don't you?
matt fury
05-18-2006, 23:13
How does viewing the RF/meter in lowlight compare between the M6 & the ZI?
telenous
05-19-2006, 00:29
I prefer all-mechanical cameras because I marvel at their clockwork mechanisms. Battery independency is a welcome bonus, not a decisive factor. My watch is mechanical, much for the same reason.
the only clockwork mechanism in cameras is a simple, dinky little slow speed escapement. it's pretty unimpressive.
telenous
05-19-2006, 02:16
Point well-taken. A matter of opinion nonetheless. You can have child-like enthusiasm about dinky little clockwork things, esp. seeing as they can last for ages.
This is an excellent point.
I've decided to automatically send myself an email every four months to replace the batteries in all my cameras. That way I'll greatly reduce the likelihood that one of them suffers sudden battery loss. The used batteries will become emergency spares.
willie
Clever idea. Might have to use that to remind myself to replace the batteries in the smoke detectors, also. The switch to and from daylight savings time just doesn't seem to work for me. :)
Ugly or not, it does remind me a lot of the Contaxes and Kievs.
Battery dependency... hogwash. We have more battery dependent gadgets on our body than we care to remember. Do they fail when we need them the most? Only when you're ignorant of the fact the batteries need recharging/replacing now and then. Same with cameras. In all my years of using battery dependent cameras I've had not once had a problem. You notice the battery go empty long before it really stop functioning. And the indicator on my R-D1 works flawlessly. It shows up, I replace the battery with a fresh one. As soon as I get home, the empty battery goes into the charger. Next morning, I take it out and put it back in my pocket/bag. Missing a decisive moment? I miss more while I sleep. I can't be bothered by it. You miss them when you have to slam in a new film, don't you? And you do that more often than replacing a battery, don't you?
The only battery dependency item on me is usually my camera. My watch is mechanical, (And, fortunately, I don't have a pacemaker yet.).
Battery dependency can become a problem if you travel abroad alot. I've found issues with finding particular batteries in Columbia and Bosnia. Not a big deal if you pack extras. As I shoot primarily digital, I'm used to being "battery dependent". Having a charger and universal electrical adapter helps with the digital cameras. When it comes to the cameras where you have to find those "button" size batteries, that's where you can run into problem. Film is usually always easy to find if you run out (or loose) that.
For me, I just like to have something that doesn't need a battery. Because, as you stated, we have more battery dependent gadgets than we care to remember.
And, I too like the "all mechanical" design behind a good camera. When Rolex starts putting batteries in their time pieces, I may rethink. :)
George, I've solved your problems. Just get a M7. You have automation, full maunal exposure, and TTL.
Al Patterson
05-23-2006, 10:56
I've been thinking of this myself. Since I'm 50, either camera should last either as long as I do or film is available. I think the M6 Classic would sell for more money at the estate sale when all my crap gets sold off, but I'll reserve stating my choice until I can look through both viewfinders.
Either one seems like an excellent choice to me.
Never Satisfied
05-23-2006, 17:20
Hi George, I would buy the Leica. A purchase such as this is something that you'll be living with for a long time and you can trust that when the Leica is getting on in years that it will still be functioning as it should and will still retain a large amount of its resale value; a mint M3 for example, will still set you back more than that of a ZI and the M3 is the best part of 50 years old. I was just in the dentical situation to you only I was tossing up between the M6, the ZI and the new R2M C/V; the M6 won. I only had a play with the ZI and can say that the finder is amazing and is nearly reason enough to buy it, but the M6 has the edge everywhere else. The CV and the ZI lack the tactile plesure that the Leica has and in reality unless you're a pro, looking to earn a living from it, it's all about the pleasure of the whole experience, not just the picture taking. IMO with the same lens mounted on either camera you'll end up with the same result, it's just which camera floats your boat. Cheers N.S.
To counter-balance this "tactile pleasure"... I never found my M2 to be much of a tactile pleasure. It's just a camera and, though admittedly a finely built one, it feels like a chunk of metal in my hands. Add to that it has no internal meter, making it difficult for me to shoot quickly in quickly varying lighting conditions (in Mongolia I can have as much as 5-7 stops difference due to very bright sun and skies and very deep shadows); that it has no AE, which reduces for me the time spend on deciding between half a stop more or less; that it scratches my glasses to no end; and that it does not have anything going over a Bessa R or a CL except for history and being finely built, I consider the M2 an nice but expensive mantle piece ornament. The M7 is different from the M2 but is it worth the thousands of $$ over the ZI? The M6 is in the same price range as the ZI, and then it becomes a matter of what you personally want. Get your a*se to B&H and fondle some cameras, George! :)
To counter-balance this "tactile pleasure"... I never found my M2 to be much of a tactile pleasure...
LOL, and well put..
Same holds for my M4. Granted, it does have nice top deck engravings, a wonderful finder, and it goes 'clop' instead of 'ker-click'. But even the lowly Bessa-T is nicer to hold.. There, I said it, blasphemy I know, but that's my take on it..
Get your a*se to B&H and fondle some cameras, George! :)
Guys, I think George's mind is already made up. After Joe's thread about his issue with his new Zeiss lens, George realized that all this Zess stuff is all junk. I think he's going with the M6.
Guys, I think George's mind is already made up. After Joe's thread about his issue with his new Zeiss lens, George realized that all this Zess stuff is all junk. I think he's going with the M6.
Kyle,
Well, truth be told, I am leaning in that direction, but my mind is not completely made up. What concerned me about Joe's thread was that it was a problem with a ZM lens. Regardless of whether I were to get the ZI or M6 - my thinking was to go with ZM lenses as providing a better cost/quality ratio. Now I'm not so sure....
Kyle,
Well, truth be told, I am leaning in that direction, but my mind is not completely made up. What concerned me about Joe's thread was that it was a problem with a ZM lens. Regardless of whether I were to get the ZI or M6 - my thinking was to go with ZM lenses as providing a better cost/quality ratio. Now I'm not so sure....
George,
Sorry to put words in your mouth. Judging by some of your responses in the other thread, I thought you had made up your mind.
back alley
05-24-2006, 09:10
and to be clear, i never said the lenses or the body were junk.
i returned the lens for an exchange not a refund, if that helps.
it should be here by friday, i hope.
joe
Since I shoot a lot with (fill-)flash and, due to our weather, fast film I lean to the ZI. AE is an option I like, too. So lower price, faster shutter and X-Sync as well as the viewfinder speak for the ZI and against the, functional comparable, M7.
And the most important argument, with the ZI I'm not in one group with the nice poster with the descriptive nickname.
and to be clear, i never said the lenses or the body were junk.
i returned the lens for an exchange not a refund, if that helps.
it should be here by friday, i hope.
joe
I know you never said that. I was being a bit snooty with my reply, unfortunately.
I love the ZM lenses, my 25/2.8 arrives today!
back alley
05-24-2006, 10:07
in fact, i would buy a black zi in a heartbeat if i had the cash!!
oh that would be sweet, 2 bodies with 25 and 50 attached...:)
joe
and to be clear, i never said the lenses or the body were junk.
i returned the lens for an exchange not a refund, if that helps.
it should be here by friday, i hope.
joe
I am truly hoping your experience was "unique" and you merely got "one made on Monday" because I really do hope the ZM lenses provide that cost/quality difference. Everytime I look at the price of new Leitz lenses I have to be revived with ammonia salts!
Granted I'd probably gravitate to used ones for that reason - but that route has its own risks.
All of this may become moot anyway - we go out to Tucson tomorrow and the better half wants some more furniture and new kitchen appliances! :eek:
Furniture, kitchen appliances = M7. I'm sure you can fit it in!
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.