Can't decide: Ikon ZM+1,5/50 or M2+1,2/35?

[jamais]

I am looking for a rangefinder camera with one fast lens.

The options are:

1. Leica M2
2. Zeiss Ikon ZM

My thoughts:
- The M2 is cheaper and a Nokton 1,2/35 would be within my budget. Maybe also a Jupiter 3 1,5/50.
- The Zeiss Ikon is new and comes with a C Sonnar 1,5/50 ZM for about the same price.
- A third option would be to buy the Zeiss Ikon set, sell the camera, keep the C Sonnar and buy an M2 and a cheaper 35mm Nokton.
- The missing light meter (M2) would not be a real drawback
- I'm not really sure about the focus shift problem of the C Sonnar but the bokeh in the pictures I have seen so far seems to be great.

Would the M2 with the Nokton 1,2/35 be a "balanced" combo? What about focusing accuracy of the M2 with super fast lenses or fast telephoto lenses?

Smooth bg rendering is very important to me. Is the C Sonnar far superior to the Jupiter 3?

Any recommendations are much appreciated!

Thanks in advance...

[thomasw_]

Both are sweet options.

The M2 is a fantastic machine. Very reliable, more so than the ZI in my rather limited, bad-luck experiences with 2 different ZIs (both were returned with alignment problems). No problems focussing fast lenses at all; I have the lux 35/1.4 asph and the 35/1,2 and they both focus fine on the M2. Same with faster 50s. But you have to get used to sunny16 and/or a hand held meter. If that is not an issue, the M2 is the best of the two for you.

Do you want the AE? if so, go with the ZI. Simple as that. Remember the Zi has a fantastic VF if you can keep your eye locked on the rf patch. I had trouble with it initially, but the VF was very bright. The ZI is battery dependent. Some make a big deal out of this. I think it matters very little unless you live North of 60. What's the big deal about sticking a spare or two in the bag? But the point is this: the ZI is non-functional w/o a battery.

Overall both are great options, but it seems as though it comes down to reliability and AE. If you want AE, get a ZI. If you shoot slide film a lot, get the ZI. If you want a more reliable body, I would go with the M2.

My 2cents, thomas

[Jason Sprenger]

I find the 35/1.2 Nokton more intrusive of the M2's viewfinder than on the ZI. It covers 25% of the lower right-hand side of the M2, noticeably less on the ZI.

I don't own a 50/1.5 ZM C Sonnar so I can't say which is best. Probably depends more on which focal length you're accustomed to.

[PlantedTao]

Agree with thomas.
If you want or need AE, then go with the ZI.
I have had no problems with the ZI and have had mine for more than a year... I dont think reliability should be an issue if bought new and from a reliable dealer. If the alignment is off send it back to the dealer for a new one, it should only take a roll to know.You cant beat the ZI's viewfinder.
You may have to factor in a CLA with the M2. The M2 is classic and has a better feel, look and all around cool factor.

[edodo]

forget the jupiter 3 50mm 1.5 it doesn't focus correctly on leicas!

[Ron (Netherlands)]

If you want to feel the authentic / classic Leica class (include the weigth) in your hands, then only the M2 will bring you satisfaction. It will focus the best lenses around (especially their own glass and at least the Carl Zeiss glass). I have also good experiences with the CV 40mm 1.4.

[back alley]

the zeiss and the 50 sonnar were made for each other.

the 50/1.5 is a unique lens, sonnar and unique character when wide - modern and sharp when closed down a bit.

joe

[ferider]

The nice thing about the M2 is that you can use the DOF markers to correct focus shift with the Sonnar. Other than that it's cheaper, and easier to fix than the ZI. RF alignment, bound to be necessary on any RF with time, is a very simple DIY job on the M2.

Other than the AE argument, the ZI has a metal shutter, which doesn't get burnt like the Leica shutters. But it's louder.

Reg. Sonnar vs. Nokton, it highly depends on what you want to shoot. The Nokton is a general purpose low light lens, basically usable at any f stop. The Sonnar can only really be used for portraits and bokeh shots upto f2.8. Only you can decide if that's enough.

Don't discard the 35/1.4 or 40/1.4 Noktons. Both great lenses and very nice to handle, so much smaller than the 1.2.

Cheers,

Roland.

[jamais]

Thank you so far for your helpful suggestions!

I think it is going to be a M2 - only the big intrusion of the 1.2-Nokton in the finder still causes some headache...

And regarding the C Sonnar:

Originally Posted by back alley

...the 50/1.5 is a unique lens, sonnar and unique character when wide - modern and sharp when closed down a bit...

Originally Posted by ferider

...The Sonnar can only really be used for portraits and bokeh shots upto f2.8...

Is it an all purpose lens or not?

Andreas

[mfogiel]

You are making a bit of confusion here...
The actual tool which would be best is the ZI+35/1.2, it lets you see the subject well in low light and it is as fast and versatile as you can only imagine:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2162/...2b5534.jpg?v=0
On the other hand, if you prefer a closer, more intimate and slower type of photography, C Sonnar is a dream lens, but at this point you can put it on an M3 for better vision:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3345/...84e711.jpg?v=0

It is not an all purpose lens, unless you want to shoot it only at f 2.8 and smaller apertures.

[back alley]

i view the sonnar as a specialty lens.

[jamais]

Thank you to everybody! I have not made a final decision yet but I have come to some other rather personal aspects.

The lack of a light meter is not a real issue for me. But it would be one for other family members who use the camera casually. AE preserves the chance that there might accumulate at least a few photographs of myself in the family album which are no self-portraits

So here ends the Leica dream - at least for now. I'll be posting other questions regarding the Bessas and the ZI in one of the other forums....