Zeiss Ikon, Convince Me

N

nasmformyzombie

Registered
Local time
4:04 PM
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
247
View My Gallery
I've read all the threads here on RFF on the Zeiss Ikon. Some problems with rangefinder accuracy, one camera dropped that popped its top, one heavy rotation user that looks like it's been to hell and back. OK, so it's no Leica M. I have an M6 in near mint condition that I paid less than a new Ikon costs. The M6 is built like a tank, but it's missing something that I like: automatic exposure. There are times for me that fiddling with shutter, aperture and focus is just too much. I've got to believe most of you Ikon users have owned (or still own) an M camera. Tell me what you like about your Ikon, especially when compared to Leica. BTW, the M7 is out of the question for me, too expensive.
 
Last edited:
nasmformyzombie said:
I've read all the threads here on RFF on the Zeiss Ikon. Some problems with rangefinder accuracy, one camera dropped that popped its top, one heavy rotation user that looks like it's been to hell and back.
Click to expand...
I think you should keep in mind that information on the Internet usually has a bias towards the negative. I mean, would you buy a Leica after reading this and this and this?

Philipp
 
Well needless to say my thoughts about the camera are pretty well known. Regardless when I looked at one at Glazer's Camera in seattle, the fellow in there, Mark, who is something of a leica experct sumed it up nicely for me "I wouldnt pay 1000 dollars for something from cosina...not when you can get something from leica"
 
Avotius said:
the fellow in there, Mark, who is something of a leica experct sumed it up nicely for me "I wouldnt pay 1000 dollars for something from cosina...not when you can get something from leica"
Click to expand...
Then again, for 1000 dollars you can't.

Philipp
 
I owned both an M7 and the Zeiss Ikon rangefinder. After some time I sold the M7. To me, they seemed functionally equivalent, but the ZI viewfinder was so superior that I just preferred shooting with it over the M7. Given my preference for using the $1200 camera over the $2500 one, selling the M7 became a no-brainer. I have had no regrets since.
LJS
 
Reasons to Buy

o lovely finder

o 1/2000 shutter speed

o ergonomics

o lightweight

o easy to load

o TTL metering works well

o great value for the $$

Reasons Not to Buy

o only a Leica can make you happy

o you photograph in extreme conditions (heat/humidity/physical abuse is likely)

o It's not a Leica


willie
 
willie_901 said:
Reasons Not to Buy

o only a Leica can make you happy

o It's not a Leica


willie
Click to expand...

Owning the name "Leica" is completely irrelevant to me. I've owned Contax SLR gear for over 20 years, long before I ever looked at a Leica. My primary concern is the Ikon camera. Is it worth $1200? There is a real irony here. While I think Kyocera made some blunders with the ergonomics of most of the SLR cameras they produced over the years, the cameras were superbly constructed. On the other hand, the Zeiss designed/Cosina built Ikon seems to be very well thought out, superior viewfinder, but the knock on it is primarily the build quality. As a long time Zeiss owner, this is particularly frustrating. Just when Zeiss gets the camera right (finally), it's seemingly not built to previous Zeiss standards.
 
first, let me say that mark from seattle is a moron.
please notice the complete lack of a smiley after that comment.

i shoot for hours in -40 temps and have not had a problem.
i keep one zi in a backpack most weekdays and it's been fine.
the meter is incredible, the finder is bar none the best of any rf camera ever made, including every leica ever made.
the zi is made from modern materials, like it or not, it's up to the buyer.

IT IS NOT A LEICA OR A CANON OR A MINOLTA OR A PANASONIC OR A SONY.
this has got to be the stupidest sentence ever muttered on the internet and passed on by countless parrots.

do you want to photograph the world around you
or do you want to photograph the world around you
with a leica?

that's the question people need to ask.

the zi is a modern state of the art throw back. it's a rangefinder.

and people who think that leica has the highest standards in the world for their cameras and lenses have had their heads up their arses for 50 years.
get over it! they make good cameras but so does cosina and nikon and sony and canon.

to the op, my advise as evidenced and supported by my very public actions is to buy what you want and then sell it if it's not what you still want after playing with it. consider the small loss of $$ a rental fee and move on.

years ago people refused to buy japanese cars because they were not american (in the states, i'm talkiing), now the american auto industry is eating it's young. then came the korean car makers...
now people are saying it's made by cosina like it's some dreaded thing, that's just plain dumb, open your eyes and look who changed the face of the rf world! leica may have started the 35mm film camera thing but who started the car industry in the states, ford, who lost billions of bucks this year and can't make a car worth a damn anymore.
get real, leica lenses fall apart because for thousands more $$ you get glue instead of screws!
wake up!!

and buy the way, i feel great today.

joe
 
It would be far from scientific, but it would be great to look at the relationship between cameras/lenses sold and people who have a legitmate problem with the camera/lens. My guess is the percent problems would be similar between the companies we are talking about these days. If you are hard on gear, no "build quality" is going to help you. If you are not hard on gear, once you have a working camera you'll likely be fine. Seems like most of the problems are right out of the box. I worry more about how the camera feels/works for me. I'd love to see the finder on an Ikon someday.
 
In my experience the aperture priority mode on the ZI works beautifully even in very difficult backlighting, dim lighting, or bright lighting. Easily the equal of the M7. I really like this camera.
LJS
 
Mark from Glazer's is a very experienced and knowledgeable Leica guy, and not a moron. His real point is that for less than the price of a new Zeiss Icon, you can get an extremely clean M6 that works perfectly. It won't have AE, of course.

Context is probably relevant. Avotius, I suspect, was talking with Mark about the two or three (sorry, Avotius, I've lost count 🙂) consecutive dud ZIs he had to put up with.
 
Well, Joe, what you say makes sense to me. I use 3 Leica M cameras regularly and I can tell you their quality control could use some improvements. My 35mm Summicron has had stiff focus from the time it was new, 10 years ago, and despite regular excersise, a trip to Leica, and a trip to Sherry: no improvement. My M4-P is actually smoother than the two M6's. And I don't particularly appreciate having to pay to get the finder upgrade (a real improvement). Even so, the Leica M is what I'm used to, it's intuitive, like a natural extension of my thinking, and while the Ikon may be a great camera, I'm not interested in changing what works for me at this time. I tried the Hexar and hated it, and that does not mean it isn't a great camera. If the Ikon works for you- fantastic! I'm not going out of my way to check one out, but hey, I'm as curious as the next guy.
 
MikeL said:
Seems like most of the problems are right out of the box. I worry more about how the camera feels/works for me. I'd love to see the finder on an Ikon someday.
Click to expand...
This is my point. ZM cameras are leaving the Cosina factory (or being abused in shipping??) with rangefinder alignment problems. For $1200 a pop (grey market), this should not be the case. It makes me wonder about either (a) quality control at the factory or (b) build quality or design of the rangefinder. The ZM viewfinder is the brightest I have ever seen (saw it/handled it at Glazers Camera in Seattle some months ago; compared it with a used M6 at the store that day). I've owned Leica M3, M6 and M7. The ZM has the best rangefinder/viewfinder of the bunch. But as a new design, it's not a proven design over time.

Back Alley, I'm with you. I would NEVER buy a new Leica anything, it's all grossly overpriced for me. But from a price perspective (hard earned $$ in my case), a used M6 and a new ZM are at roughly the same price point. But is a new ZM as good a machine as a used M6? Don't tell me to buy both---while I can sell the M6 for what I paid for it, the Zeiss ZM will lose a minimum of $250 as soon as I take it out of the box. That's a pricey test drive and assumes a ZM without rangefinder alignment issues.
 
His real point is that for less than the price of a new Zeiss Icon, you can get an extremely clean M6 that works perfectly.

this is a bogus argument. from anyone.

for the same money or less i can buy a camera that is new or a camera that is 20 years old.
 
i have 2 zi bodies.
the first one was off at infinity, was sent back and i got another body.
this one was and still is perfect.
the second body was perfect out of the box and still is.

i'm not getting into one vs another in terms of quality, but when i hear 'it's no leica' the red kryptonite hits the fan!!
 
back alley said:
His real point is that for less than the price of a new Zeiss Icon, you can get an extremely clean M6 that works perfectly.

this is a bogus argument. from anyone.

for the same money or less i can buy a camera that is new or a camera that is 20 years old.
Click to expand...
I think many people here would disagree with you both about whether the argument is bogus and about what they would choose to spend their $1500 on. Obviously, one can often get much more for the same money by buying used.

In any event, should you, as a moderator, be calling someone a moron on this forum, especially when you simply disagree with one isolated opinion the person is reported to have expressed?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom