M7 or a Zeiss Ikon ZM?

[kshapero]

Used mint m7 or new ZM?

[Krosya]

Wasnt this done/asked here, like 2000000000000000 times?

[b.espahbod]

this is 2000000000000001st

but whatever you like

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by Krosya

Wasnt this done/asked here, like 2000000000000000 times?

Yes, but not yet by everybody. (Courtesy of Karl Valentin.)

Also I like the "why?" in the poll question, as if I could do anything else except clicking on one of the two options.

[astroman]

Ziess Ikon,why because I own one

And lets be nice people

[35mmdelux]

I comes down to two items: 1) the industrial construction of the M7, and 2) affordability.

My choice M7.

[aperture64]

I had a problem with an M7 and had to return it. Make sure it has the optical DX coding, if you go for the M7.

[Keith]

M7 ... because I'm a born again Leica snob!

[helenhill]

Originally Posted by Keith

M7 ... because I'm a born again Leica snob!

hehehe........

Best to YOU- H

[lewis44]

M7.... Owned two and neither one had a problem. Took a Lickin' and kept on Tickin'

[aizan]

whichever one looks the best with the lenses you have or want to get. =)

[hiromu]

If you shoot with AE, go with ZI as M7's compensation is not easiest to use. If you expose manually, then go with M6.

[bennyng]

I have both ZI and M7. I will always pick the ZI over the M7 as it handles much better, has cleaner framelines and a fantastic viewfinder. AE is a breeze too.

Cheers,

[calexg]

For the record, I have never touched either. Having said that, I would go the Zeiss Ikon.

Why?

Because it has a brighter viewfinder. Because the way you adjust exposure compensation is genius. Because it's smaller and lighter. Because the rangefinder baselength is longer.

I bought my M4-2 because I wanted something tough and manual--no electronics whatsoever. I use the camera to take pictures of things that give me time to think about exposure. If I wanted to shoot candids or street shots, I would probably go for a camera with AE--something small, lightweight, and inconspicuous. It would be the Zeiss Ikon, for sure. It costs less, and I don't care that it's not as heavy-duty as the M7 because I don't see myself ever treating it poorly (that's what the M4-2 is for!).

Just my 2¢.

[jonmanjiro]

Zeiss Ikon = better finder.

The best option of all is to buy a used ZI and spend the rest on glass!

[Avotius]

for sure my choice would be the m7 because I have had the experience of 3 ZI's that had serious enough "must return" defects out of the box. I also prefer the shutter speed readout on the m7.

[maddoc]

I have neither owned an M7 nor an ZI but played with both of them, the M7 had the better exposure info and much clearer rangefinder patch, the ZI has easier to see 28mm frame lines (wearing glasses). Since a clear and contrasty RF patch is more important for me than frame lines, I would buy the M7 if I had to choose between them.

On th eother hand, best value for the money is still the Hexar RF, IMHO.

[calexg]

Originally Posted by maddoc

On th eother hand, best value for the money is still the Hexar RF, IMHO.

Good point. OP: I'd consider the Hexar as well.

[35mmdelux]

The .58 mag black M7 I shoot with is seriously unbelievable for the 35mm framelines. The AE makes shooting a piece of cake and the exp comp couldn't be easier (slight twist of the wheel) AFAIK.

[matt335]

If you go the M7 then you can probably afford the Ikon as well. Last week I held both cameras in my hands helping a friend make similar decision, and looked very closely at them both. The Ikon is a top little camera. I would actually prefer a M6TTL. It's also about "how it feels in your hands" and how "easily you bring it to your eye and grab an image". I think you will find that a M7 will last longer. Good luck with your decision. Getting a Leica is a lifetime decision. A friend for life.

[drewbarb]

Never owned either one, but I've handled and looked through both.

Issues can crop up with any camera- and there are documented potential issues with each of these; but having read some about the subject, and talked with and listened to owners of both, I'd spend my money on a ZI first.

Reasons I'll cite are the faster flash sync and better (bigger, brighter, more flare resistant) finder- as well as the fact that I already have M3's, which will remain my primary 35mm shooters for now.

[Keith]

Interesting that the two choices are running virtually neck and neck ... I started a similar poll about a year ago and the Ikon was a decisive winner.

I subsequently went on to sell my M7 and buy an Ikon and have no regrets ... in very low light shooting the Zeiss has no peer IMO. I do miss the feel of the M7 but would never buy another one as there were a couple of things about it that bothered me ... now and then though I do get overpowering urges to own a black paint MP!

[Sam N]

I'm surprised that this is the M forum (as opposed to general RF or the ZI forum) and there is a tie. That speaks to how impressive the ZI is.

Anyway a new ZI would still cost way less than a used M7.

I tried to think of something I don't like about the ZI and I can't really think of anything.... maybe the fact that the tripod socket isn't centered, but the same applies to the M7. I've only tried using a tripod w/ it once anyway.

[elshaneo]

My Personal Choice would definitely be the Leica M7, and in case that You want to sell it later, You won't likely lose anything on the resale value.

[mfogiel]

The question is a bit confusing. The ZI comes only in the .74 magnification, and in my opinion outclasses the 0.72x M7 as a photographic tool, except for:
- a slightly higher noise level
- a MARGINALLY more delicate body - this includes the usual periodic RF misalignment
,on the other hand, not being built like a tank it also weighs less than a tank...

However, in other magnifications, the ZI simply does not exist, and so having to choose between a Bessa R3A or R4A and a M7 0.85 or 0.58, I definitely prefer the Leica, in fact I am looking to buy a 0.58x one currently...