Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Rangefinder Photography Discussion

Rangefinder Photography Discussion General discussions about Rangefinder Photography. This is a great place for questions and answers that are not addressed in a specific category. Take note there is also a General Photography forum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Who of you would choose Zeiss over Leica?
Old 10-31-2006   #1
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
 
Ash is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,196
Who of you would choose Zeiss over Leica?

Since I've been moving up in the RF world, with my recent wages from a temp job being splurged on cameras, it led me to think... When I bought the Zorki and FED, my eyes still wandered to the Kiev so I bought one of them too. I preferred using it although it's bulkier, more problems with frame spacing etc, and limited lens choice so I use it less, but prefer the feel.

I have two Leicas, both feel great in the hand, but when the Contax arrives will I find myself using it more? This is under the impression the camera is in as good condition as the auction made out.


Course this is out of curiosity.

The new Zeiss Ikon's, who would choose one over a Leica M? Who prefer's Zeiss to Leica here? I'm talking cameras, not glass in case people want to banter over that too!
__________________
www.nps160.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #2
darkkavenger
Massimiliano Mortillaro
 
darkkavenger's Avatar
 
darkkavenger is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Age: 41
Posts: 1,899
I'm more interested in Carl Zeiss equipment than Leica, be it vintage or recent. You have to try a 180/2.8 Sonnar to understand what quality is
__________________
Best regards,
Max.




Contax/Kiev & PENTACON six amateur

Website & Links
Website - Company - Flickr

  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #3
Magnus
 
Posts: n/a
it's all perception of the mind... leica has the red dot which will cause people to die in "trade wars" Zeisse has the better imaging ... 25mm for instance ... but it lacks the red dot

I don't know what you do, but if your a dentist or such you will prefer leica, if your a serious photog. looking for the best images you'll go for zeiss, just look at the charts and they'll explain it to you

"the magical Leica glow" maybe 40 years ago, but not anymore.

Mind you Leica bodies are the best. I use an M4 for over 30 years now and it#s reckomendable in every situation. Must of done over 200k shots, still slick as a long time 42nd ave. pimp.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #4
mervynyan
Mervyn Yan
 
mervynyan is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 684
why not have both? a ZI and a MP will rock, but I find myself in a predicament of using only one, so MP is it.
__________________
a traveler by heart, along pick up photography
- MP/M240, 35LuxASPH, 50LuxASPH, 75Cron AA, 21CBiogen
- Arca-Swiss Discovery, D4M, Schneider SSXL 110/5.6, Nikkor-W 210/5.6
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #5
sebastel
coarse art umbrascriptor
 
sebastel's Avatar
 
sebastel is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: highdelberg
Posts: 1,163
looking at my own experience ... leica body, zeiss lens.
this does not mean that i believe that the current leica lens are bad. it's a matter of preference. i for one don't like some aspects of the look of the aspherical lenses.

cheers,
sebastian
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #6
Nachkebia
Registered User
 
Nachkebia is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 36
Posts: 1,992
I am over zeiss, but just because of money (just sex) no hard feelings
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nachkebia/

Zeiss Ikon, Leica M7, 21,25,35 biogon ZM, 28 elmarit ASPH, 50 planar ZM, 50 summilux asph
(hardcore nikonian)
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #7
Magnus
 
Posts: n/a
nahhhh forget the Leica and go with Zeiss as a complete kit, if I didn't have all the leica gear I would go for zeiss.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #8
ywenz
Registered User
 
ywenz is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,456
The Ikon looks clumsy, whereas the Leica M looks sleek.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #9
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
 
Ash is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,196
you think ywenz? I think the Ikon's look more classy
__________________
www.nps160.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #10
Nachkebia
Registered User
 
Nachkebia is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 36
Posts: 1,992
I think leicas are wayy more sleek and classy and sexy than zeiss ikons, expecialy when you hold them but again our life is a compromise
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nachkebia/

Zeiss Ikon, Leica M7, 21,25,35 biogon ZM, 28 elmarit ASPH, 50 planar ZM, 50 summilux asph
(hardcore nikonian)
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #11
vol72
Registered User
 
vol72 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee USA
Posts: 62
Why do we incessantly pit Zeiss against Leica? I have used both makes through the years, and throw out most blanket statements. I believe the majority of us cannot actually see the small differences between the two. Inherent in photographers must be something that demands that we validate ourselves by our choices in camera gear. Buy what you like and go make images. The rest is just grist for the mill.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #12
ywenz
Registered User
 
ywenz is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,456
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
you think ywenz? I think the Ikon's look more classy
I'm not a fan of the film winder on the Ikon, it looks like a piece of melted metal of abritrary shape.. Its shape conflicts with the rest of the camera design and over all the camera has no strong form or design whatsoever:


But the M... ahhhhh (deep breath)



I've said it before, the Ikon looks like a design where the engineer threw everything they need onto a "block" and called it a camera. From the front view, the Ikon looks like it could have been designed using MS Word and playing around the the page margines feature...


Last edited by ywenz : 10-31-2006 at 12:51.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #13
grantray
Registered User
 
grantray is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Greenpoint, Brooklyn
Posts: 147
I went for the Zeiss over the Leica film body as I have no interest in bottom loading in a crowded street. I'll most likely stick to ZM lenses on the M8 since I've always been wowed by Tessar glass qualities.

-grant
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #14
Nachkebia
Registered User
 
Nachkebia is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 36
Posts: 1,992
ywenz : For me it looks like zeiss was designed by germans (zeiss has kind of medical feel to it silver one) and leica by italians
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nachkebia/

Zeiss Ikon, Leica M7, 21,25,35 biogon ZM, 28 elmarit ASPH, 50 planar ZM, 50 summilux asph
(hardcore nikonian)
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #15
ywenz
Registered User
 
ywenz is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,456
Little details like the exposed adjustment screw on the MP and the slotted frameline light window adds to the look of the Leica. The The Zeiss is lacking these details. The flush windows on the Leica also gives it a more ridgid (carved from one piece of metal) look compared to the Ikon's recessed window frames.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #16
Ash
Selflessly Self-involved
 
Ash is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,196
vol72, I didnt mean to start a big flame-debate thing, I simply wondered who prefers using Zeiss cameras. A lot of photography comes down to comfort. If a camera isn't nice to use, then I won't get as good photo's, since a lot of concentration will be exhausted on using the camera, rather than getting the shot.
__________________
www.nps160.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #17
Fred
Feline Great
 
Fred's Avatar
 
Fred is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chippenham Wiltshire England
Age: 54
Posts: 940
For use, I'd have to go with the Leica, having said that apart from the Photo Imaging show in Brum earlier this year I'd not had the chance to try the ZI, not in the real world anyway. I seemed to have felt at home with my Leica from the moment I got it. I can't quite say the same about the ZI, its a nice camera and arguably much better value for money but the M does it for me, but so does my Bessa R but for different reasons.
__________________
Bessa L & R, M7 and a bunch of bottles, MF and SLR stuff.
Fred is the cat. R.I.P. Tony S is the name
Phreds Photos
My Gallery
Usin up the future
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #18
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,676
Happy Hallowe'en. It is always interesting to see people self-report on this stuff. Personally, I was one of those people who voted for the M3 in the recent (?) choose-a-pretty-camera poll. Not the majority opinion, I understand. I suspect (my bias fully showing) that in 50 years, my Leicas will still be snapping. After all, I have 50 year old Leicas that are currently in fine shape. The current brand of Zeisses? Well, we'll just have to see. Check in with me in 50 years and we'll see whose camera is still clicking away. To be fair, I do have a 40 year old Contax and a Nikon RF of similar vintage . . . they do seem to be chugging along just fine. Now if anyone wants to inflict me with a current Zeiss Ikon just to see if my mind can be changed, I'm open to the possibility. . . anyone? Hmmm.
__________________
Benjamin’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #19
jano
Evil Bokeh
 
jano is offline
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,203
I think the ikon is actually kinda ugly, the word "medical" certainly comes to mind But it works very well for me

I hope someone can adopt the canonet quick load thing.. my god that's awesome. Even though the ZI is normal loading as opposed to the leica's strange bottom loading, I still fumble with it and can't seem to do it quick. *shrug*
__________________

O meu bumbum era flácido
mas esse assunto é tão místico
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #20
sf
Registered User
 
sf is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Marks
Happy Hallowe'en. It is always interesting to see people self-report on this stuff. Personally, I was one of those people who voted for the M3 in the recent (?) choose-a-pretty-camera poll. Not the majority opinion, I understand. I suspect (my bias fully showing) that in 50 years, my Leicas will still be snapping. After all, I have 50 year old Leicas that are currently in fine shape. The current brand of Zeisses? Well, we'll just have to see. Check in with me in 50 years and we'll see whose camera is still clicking away. To be fair, I do have a 40 year old Contax and a Nikon RF of similar vintage . . . they do seem to be chugging along just fine. Now if anyone wants to inflict me with a current Zeiss Ikon just to see if my mind can be changed, I'm open to the possibility. . . anyone? Hmmm.

I am a Leica lover, for sure. Don't like many things about the Ikon. I do think it has a nicer finder, though. Every other thing, the Leica is tops.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #21
Toby
On the alert
 
Toby is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: West Wittering, West Sussex
Age: 49
Posts: 776
It's all a question of tools for different jobs. I live near a large housing project / council estate. On the whole, although I can see the virtues in ZI or Leica, I'd only use what I could afford to lose so my user bessa R is the tool for for high risk jobs like this one.
__________________
My Website
Mon Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #22
climbing_vine
-
 
climbing_vine's Avatar
 
climbing_vine is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Age: 42
Posts: 554
Craziness. The Leica's film advance lever is totally out of proportion to the rest of the body, the rangefinder window on the front has no bezel, the shutter speed dial is just hanging out there whereas the one on the Zeiss is nestled just in place, the self-timer is totally wrong (similar to the advance lever... from a pure visual design standpoint the Leica is far, far clunkier to this eye. The Zeiss is much more in keeping with the classic approach to proportion and such.

Ergonomically... I have very small hands for a man, and they are none too nimble so I appreciate ease of mechanical operations. I haven't handled them extensively but the Zeiss feels far more "right" in these hands. YMWV (You Mileage *Will* Vary).


-bdh

Quote:
Originally Posted by ywenz
I'm not a fan of the film winder on the Ikon, it looks like a piece of melted metal of abritrary shape.. Its shape conflicts with the rest of the camera design and over all the camera has no strong form or design whatsoever:

I've said it before, the Ikon looks like a design where the engineer threw everything they need onto a "block" and called it a camera. From the front view, the Ikon looks like it could have been designed using MS Word and playing around the the page margines feature...

Last edited by climbing_vine : 10-31-2006 at 16:15.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #23
venchka
Registered User
 
venchka's Avatar
 
venchka is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Age: 74
Posts: 6,211
Economics. Dollars and sense. Someday I would like to own a lens wider than 35mm. A black lens. The ZI 25mm lens makes the most sense for my dollars.
__________________
Wayne
Deep in the darkest heart of the East Texas Rain forest.
Quote:
"Leave me alone, I know what I'm doing" Kimi Raikkonen
My Gallery
My Blog-Reborn
FlickrMyBookTwitSpaceFace
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #24
Stephan
 
Posts: n/a
I prefer the cool-ish color rendition of zeiss lenses, but I prefer the brick-like construction qualiti of leica bodies.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #25
peter_n
~
 
peter_n's Avatar
 
peter_n is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 8,772
Cameras - I use Leicas and I have held two ZI cams and I may be biased or just acclimated to them but I do prefer the Leica bodies. I would definitely be interested in one or two Zeiss lenses if they removed the bump from the focusing ring. Since they probably won't I'll stick with mainly Leica and some CV and Konica glass.
__________________
_
~Peter

My RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #26
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
 
Gabriel M.A.'s Avatar
 
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,991
If there's a contest for a million Euros (face it, let's stick with the winners) and the prize is to own a camera with a brand in reverse alphabetical order, then I would choose Zeiss over Leica.

Otherwise, I just choose both their optics.

I do choose briefs over boxers.
__________________
Big wig wisdom: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --Harry Warner, of Warner Bros., 1927

Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).


My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #27
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
 
Gabriel M.A.'s Avatar
 
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nachkebia
ywenz : For me it looks like zeiss was designed by germans (zeiss has kind of medical feel to it silver one) and leica by italians
We know both were designed by Germans. Just one set of designers went to Ikea while the other set went to Venice
__________________
Big wig wisdom: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --Harry Warner, of Warner Bros., 1927

Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).


My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #28
Kyle
 
Posts: n/a
I bought a ZI back in April. I used it and loved it for months. An M2 was my second camera, which is a great camera. In the back of my mind I always longed for an MP, though, but never thought I could afford it. However, recently I started to really get the itch for an MP. I did a little research and realized that if I sold off the ZI (or the M2) plus my 25/2.8 ZM (which I rarely used as I'm not necessarily a super-wide guy) I could afford a used MP. I ended up finding a very nice MP at a great price, and the seller is going to help me honor the warranty for the next four years. I ended up selling the ZI, mainly cause I got no interested in the M2 and I really wanted the MP. The ZI was a great camera, but I had that itch to get the Leica, despite being such a nice camera, I sorta felt like I was 'settling' I guess.

The finder of the ZI is incredible, but the MP is no slouch, either. However, IMO the feel of the ZI just doesn't compare to the MP, which is hands down, the nicest camera I've ever handled.

Here's the main thing to remember which I realized through all of this. I know I'm not the first person to ever figure this out, but I'll say it again: If you can, get what you really want first. It will save a lot of time, effort, and money. I lost a lot of money buying a new ZI and then selling it a few months later and buying the MP, but I'm OK with that, since I've wanted one from the beginning. I think that now I can honestly say that this is the last main camera I'll ever want to buy. I might be tempted to do something like get an M3, because its a classic, but beyond something like that, there's nowhere for me to go.

I was awake for 32 hours straight. I finally got about 2 and a half hours of sleep and just woke up. If my thoughts are scattered and all over the place, then that's the reason.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #29
Bromo33333
Registered User
 
Bromo33333's Avatar
 
Bromo33333 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 65
I did choose Zeiss over Leica. I wanted a new camera, and the Zeiss, while pricey, was about half of what the Leica would have cost - no contest. I can still use Leica Lenses if I choose to as well - so for me there is little down side.

I never had auto aperture before and it is kind of cool.
__________________
===============================
B&D
Rochester, NY
===============================
Film: Kodak TMAX & Tri-X
RF: Zeiss Ikon + 35mm/f2 ZM; Kiev 4A + Jupiter-8
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #30
Kyle
 
Posts: n/a
BTW, I still love the ZM lenses, and the 50/1.5 is my main lens right now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #31
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,926
Not I. While the Zeiss looks like a wonderful camera, for me, it's Leica.

I know my Leicas will be able to be fixed in 40 years. It may cost some money, DAG's son or someone will be able to fix the shutter. I doubt the same will be said about the ZI.

I like having the option for a winder, not that I use them all the time, but they are on almost every body.

I do not need a self-time that can not give me a 10 second exposure (ala F2).

That does not mean I think it's Leica or nothing. I love my S2 and hope to get a user SP in a year or two. Loading the M6 is, well, special, very special. I can do it walking down the street, but it is a pain.

I expect better from ZI when building a new camera with 40 years of good and bad camera ideas to look at.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #32
ghost
Registered User
 
ghost is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 703
i would choose a snickers bar over a kit kat.

uh, i mean, i would choose a black paint zeiss ikon over everything but an a la carte black paint mp with angled rewind crank, hinged advance lever, and vulcanite-style leatherette.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #33
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,241
the canon p is still the best!

it's all a crap shoot and it's all mostly about what you happen to own at the time.
i have a pretty good stereo and when i want to totally experience the music i am listening to i use it.
i also have a clock radio for msuic listening to fall asleep to.
they both do the job and sound good to me. sure one is way different than the other. and it needs to be that way because i can't fit 5 speakers and a hugh subwoofer on my bedside table.

i happen to like the looks of the zi and that's good because i wanted new equipment. i would have gone the cv bessa# route if the zi hadn't landed on my door.
most people, when talking about leicas, end up talking about 20 to 50 year old machines and that's fine...but i wanted new, and i wanted a swing back. listen to folks talk about loading a leica, it's funny hearing all the 'it's not as hard as people say' routines. the zi is not hard to load at all. no one says it is...
i like leica. the m3 is probably the smoothest most refined camera i have ever owned. but it's still a bottom loader and that is not acceptable to me.

buy what makes you happy, use what works for you.

there is no comparison worth making if you really like what you have.

joe
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #34
Kyle
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by back alley
buy what makes you happy, use what works for you.

there is no comparison worth making if you really like what you have.
Joe hit the nail on the head!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-31-2006   #35
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
 
Trius's Avatar
 
Trius is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester, NY & Toronto area
Posts: 8,257
ywenz: about industrial design, I really do agree with you. But I want the long baseline and framelines of the ZI. Guess that means M4-2 or M6 for me. That said, I haven't held a ZI, whereas I have owned an M3. I'm so conflicted. As for lenses, I'm pretty sold on Zeiss or a combination of both. Then there's the CV Nokton 40.
__________________
My Gallery Flickr
Fine grain is a bourgeois concept

Happiness is APX100 and Rodinal 1:100

A bunch o cameras. Does it really matter?
And NOW ... Fuji X-Pro1 w/ 18-55, 18/2 & adapted Zuikos and Hexanons
http://zuikoholic.tumblr.com
https://www.instagram.com/e.r.dunbar/
http://weedram.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2006   #36
x-ray
Registered User
 
x-ray's Avatar
 
x-ray is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Tennessee USA
Age: 71
Posts: 4,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by vol72
Why do we incessantly pit Zeiss against Leica? I have used both makes through the years, and throw out most blanket statements. I believe the majority of us cannot actually see the small differences between the two. Inherent in photographers must be something that demands that we validate ourselves by our choices in camera gear. Buy what you like and go make images. The rest is just grist for the mill.
Well spoken! I have a mix of ZM and Leica glass and bodies. Each maker makes particular lenses that are better than others bit no maker makes all lenses the best. Leica has some excellent glass and so does Zeiss. The same is true for bodies.

Magnus put it very well too. There is no Leica glow other than what's in the mind.


vol72 - I'm in Knoxville too - we need to link up.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2006   #37
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
 
Pherdinand's Avatar
 
Pherdinand is offline
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: by the river called the Gender
Age: 43
Posts: 7,828
i prefer bodies with not so rounded corners (except when they are alive), so, based on the look, zeiss is far ahead. This is valid for the 50 y old Zeiss Contax cameras too.
__________________
Happy New Year, Happy New Continent!
eye contact eye
My RFF Foolery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2006   #38
ray_g
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkkavenger
I'm more interested in Carl Zeiss equipment than Leica, be it vintage or recent. You have to try a 180/2.8 Sonnar to understand what quality is
Is that for the Pentacon mount, Max? Would you know it it has the same optics as the Olympic Sonnar for 35mm, in C/Y or M42 mount?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2006   #39
ray_g
 
Posts: n/a
I would be happy with either one. For me, it was just a matter of what was available, and price. When time came to get a "modern" body, it was either a new ZI for (then) $1500 vs a mint classic M6 for 2/3 that.

As regards lenses, sure certain lenses are better than others. However, at this level of price, performance, and quality, they are all great lenses and I would be hard pressed to tell the difference between modern Zeiss and Leica glass. With wet prints, maybe, but not after the film has been scanned and post-processed, and especially not on a computer screen.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2006   #40
Flyfisher Tom
Registered User
 
Flyfisher Tom's Avatar
 
Flyfisher Tom is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: on the river ...
Posts: 1,974
Both make excellent products, no reason to let brand name rule, let your needs dictate which body or lens make more sense.
__________________
regards,

Tom
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Zeiss lenses and Leica M stric Leica M Film Cameras 8 08-09-2009 03:43
Zeiss ZM versus Leica M7 Framelines kingsley Konica RF / Zeiss Ikon ZM Leica Mount Rangefinders 0 10-26-2006 16:31
Some test shots: Zeiss vs. Leica awilder Konica RF / Zeiss Ikon ZM Leica Mount Rangefinders 65 10-08-2005 10:13
New Zeiss Ikon Rangefinder SolaresLarrave Rangefinder Photography Discussion 93 11-01-2004 16:31
Leica SLR digital camera MP Guy Rangefinder Photography Discussion 0 10-02-2003 14:26



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:45.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.