Older 2.8 collapsible elmar and Zeiss Ikon?

[grantray]

I just traded in ALL of my camera gear, (excluding my Leica D2), for the Zeiss and a 50/2 Biogon at B&H a couple of weeks ago. Yes, it's fantastic, of course.

That said, I kept the elmar because I wanted to use it on the Zeiss. However, Ken, who sold me the set-up, and the other guys were apprehensive about using the elmar because they were unsure of shutter interference. The upstairs guys at B&H won't let the floor have a disply model, so they have no experiance with the camera.

I know they could have been simply forcing an upsale, but the fact is I wanted the Biogon regardless. Now they still have me scared to mount the elmar on the Zeiss.

That said, does anyone here know if there is a compatability issue? I tend to think not as I remember reading that the Zeiss internals are Cosina. And Gandy's site lists the elmar as usable, just not completely collapsible on the R2a and R3a. I could be wrong.

Thanks,
Grant

[Ronald M]

Why not open the back, set the shutter to B-open, and collapse the lens? Visual inspection should tell if it will interfer with the shutter or camera inerds.

You can also measure the debth of the collapsed section with the lens off the camera, then measure the distance to the shutter from the lens flange.

Just use cut paper strips so as not to damage anything.

Please write how the old elmar images compared to the Biogon.

[grantray]

I just popped in a roll of 36 exp. 1600 ektachrome a few hours ago, (which I'm pushing to 3200 for night street-shooting). So I'll have to finish the roll before I can do that. Has anyone else tried this already?

-grant

[grantray]

So, the elmar does not fully collapse, but also does not touch the shutter when collapsed. Instead it is stopped by the interior grey, ribbed element, whose proper name I do not know, just shy of being fully compressed into the body. The barrel comes dangerously close to focusing wheel, so even using other collapsible lenses with less throw isn't something I would recommend; as the stubs that lock the barrel into place when extended may catch when collapsing or extending and cause damage.

As for shooting- making rapid adjustments for spontaneous shooting is like grainy sand with the elmar compaired to the the velvet of the zeiss. Nothing bad, just that the elmar requires more time to set up unless locked on infinity. As long you choose the elmar lens for its specific aesthetic, its still a gem of course.

-grant

[Way]

Thanks for the info!

Way

[Huck Finn]

Originally Posted by grantray

That said, does anyone here know if there is a compatability issue? I tend to think not as I remember reading that the Zeiss internals are Cosina. And Gandy's site lists the elmar as usable, just not completely collapsible on the R2a and R3a. I could be wrong.

I'm glad you figured it out.

Just as an aside, the internals of the ZI are not "Cosina" - by which I mean not the same as Cosina's own Bessa bodies, so you cannot make assumptions about one camera from the other. As an example, regardless of the shutter components, the ZI body does not have the same depth as the Bessa bodies, so there isn't as much room to work with for the purposes of your collapsible lens. Since the design of the 2 bodies are different, there may be other differences in internal parts & their positioning that affect such an issue that cannot be anticipated from a Bessa body.

FWIW, the Bessa cameras & the ZI share the same mechanical shutter components, which are off the shelf from Copal, but the electronics of the R2/3A shutter are different from those of the ZI shutter, which were specially designed for this camera. Since earlier Bessa cameras have mechanical shutters, they of course have a different firing mechanism altogether than the electronic shutters of either the R2/3A or the the ZI. The differences in the electronic firing mechanisms of the shutters on the two cameras also results in a different AE lock - manual on the R2/3A vs "permanent" on the ZI.

Other internals of the ZI that are not Cosina would include the rangefinder itself, the viewfinder, the re-wind mechanism, the frame lines, film counter/film advance, frame selection mechanism, & film channel linings off the top of my head. In other words, there are a lot of parts in place that are different & how they interface when everything comes together may create additional differences even when other parts like the shutter blades are the same. An example of this is the fact that the longer rangefinder base created the necessity of a more complicated arrangement of the light channel from the small RF window because it had to be worked in around the shutte speed mechanism, which would not be an issue with the shorter base rangefinder of the R2/3A.

Enjoy the camera; it's a unique piece of work.

Huck

[grantray]

Got my slides back from shooting with both the elmar and 50/2 ZM. THe color capabilities of that Ziess are trully cinematic. I only looked them over with a loop on the light table at US Color Lab off of Lafayette st., but the color, gradation, and rich texture are astounding. And that was with the 1600 pushed to 3200! Next round will be with Provia 100.

Oh, and the elmar gives off a great retro nuance.

New images will be up on my site after I recover from Mardi Gras.

-grant

[amateriat]

Grant: we're prctically within spitting distance of each other (I'm in Park Slope). Very interested in how you manage with that ZI.

Random notes:

- I know that my Hexar RF bodies won't grok too well with certain collapsible Leica glass for the same reason (don't know about the collapsible 50 Konica made briefly in the mid-90s in LTM, but since those are rare as hen's teeth, I suppose it's a moot point). So the idea of the ZI being a far cry from a rebadged CV (Rollei RF, anyone?) seems to be more than just hype.

- One big difference between the ZI and CV bodies (and of more than academic interest for me) is that the ZI's framelines change automatically when you change lenses – not a minor engineering change by any means.

I'd like to have a good look at a ZI before long...


- Barrett

[wlewisiii]

One thought with the collapsable Elmar - I'm using a collapsible I-22 on my CL and to keep it out of the way of the meter stalk, I need to use one of my wife's elastic hair binders wrapped around the lens barrel. Even though you say that the Elmar is stopped by the light baffle, you may wish to use something similar in case you're in a hurry and close the lens down harder or faster than you should. Even if the lens doesn't break through you could end up with bits of metal in your shutter and I, somehow, doubt that would do it much good.

William

[grantray]

Actually, I will NEVER collapse a lens that is attached to the Zeiss body. I did it once for the purpose of observation.

I've observed. It's too risky for my comfort.

Also, I don't beliieve the Zeiss to be a rebadged anything. I know quite a bit about boutique manufacturing from my previous life in New Orleans. And the more I study this camera, use it and handle it, the more I understand the thought process as to why the camera is designed the way it is. For instance, the engineers/designers didn't just look at Leica, just look at Rollie, just look at Minolta, etc. That would be an assumption that most likely insults their intelligence. They have a thorough command of the history of the rangefinder. The placement of controls for intuitive use of the camera is a study of ALL rangefinders.

Could they have built a direct market competitor for Leica? Of course, but I don't believe that to be the goal they had in mind when they started this project. That they outsourced production is a common practice in modern high-end auto manufacturing, with the exception of TVR and Morgan.

-grant

[grantray]

New shots are up. Night 16 through 23. Snaps 24 and 25. Snap 24 was shot with the elmar. All other new shots are with the 50/2 ZM.

-grant