ALL ZI & ZI SW production stopped

"And, of course, it's not exactly Zeiss. More Cosina."

I'm curious about how this works. The US warranty is from Zeiss. Does Zeiss actually keep parts & fix ZI bodies in US, or do they send them back for repair to Cosina in Japan?

Kirk
 
thompsonks said:
"And, of course, it's not exactly Zeiss. More Cosina."

I'm curious about how this works. The US warranty is from Zeiss. Does Zeiss actually keep parts & fix ZI bodies in US, or do they send them back for repair to Cosina in Japan?

Kirk
Click to expand...

I recently had problems with my Zeiss Ikon SW and contacted Zeiss to inquire where I should send my camera to. I was told to send it to Zeiss in Germany, as it is a Zeiss camera officially. Their service is top notch!
 
I forwarded mine to the U.S. Zeiss representative and he handled the Germany side of things. Much the same with my Contax RTS III, which went to Tocad and from there to Japan. As long as there are parts we should be fine.
 
Sad times. Though I've never owned one, I really appreciated how the Ikon offered so much at a much more affordable price than a Leica. I hope this just means something better is going to come from Zeiss.
 
Perhaps time to pick up another ZI before the prices start inching up.

I find that my ZI is the best camera I have ever used. I've tried to bond with the Ms -- having owned an M4 and then an M6. Both got sold as I prefer the ZI, mainly for the VF. Maybe an M3 will do the trick?
 
kanzlr said:
I am not really surprised. I wonder which rangefinder to get for a while now, and I would never consider a new ZI when for the price I can get a used M6TTL with recent CLA and 6 months warranty. Even used ZIs are around €700 to €800 depending on condition.
Click to expand...

The reasons to get a new ZI instead of a used M6:

1. Amazing viewfinder, i.e. bigger, brighter, no flare, uncluttered.
2. Longer effective RF baseline in a camera with 28 mm frame lines.
3. Quicker shutter response time to capture The Moment.
4. It's new, not someone else's refurbished camera.

The best things about this camera are different than the best things about the M6 TTL. Everyone has their preferences.
 
I love mine. It just feels great to bring it to my eye. It has become my go-to 35mm camera (replacing my Nikon FE2). The 35mm f/2 is such a nice lens on it.

There was only a few slight issues that I would have liked to seen updated. One is the red shutter speeds can get lost on the side of the viewfinder. I'm left eye dominate and use it to frame. If I use my right eye, it doesn't seem as bad.

Another is the grip material wears. I have seen some nice leather done in the other thread, so it's not a big deal.

The last is that mine goes through batteries faster than I would have expected. My Nikon FE2 probably does double the rolls per battery set.
 
Bill58 said:
I've handled one and the VF was indeed nice, but I never understood putting it on the market. It seemed to me that it was in-between the Bessas and Leicas quality-wise and maybe 10 years too late.

I wonder if they made any $$ out of it?

On the other hand, a digital one makes a lot of sense.
Click to expand...

I think that being between a Bessa and a Leica quality was precisely the point of putting it out.

Canon and Nikon, for example, have for decades had their entry level, intermediate, and advanced SLRs. The build quality of a pro camera isn't necessary for someone who isn't subjecting their camera to the same amount of abuse. Nor is the price that goes along with it.

The advanced features of a pro camera aren't necessarily desired or needed by many amateurs. Neither is the price that is required to include them.

Providing choices is a great service to the consumer. Carl Zeiss AG emphasized certain attributes in their design and implementation of this camera and ignored other features that could have been included. For those who value what makes this camera special, that was a good thing.

I agree that it was 10 years too late. It took the Rangefinder revival, stimulated by Cosina's manufacture of affordable RF cameras and putting them in the hands of users, some of whom then wanted more. The timing was what it was. Something no one could control. The past decade or so has been an exciting time for rangefinder fans. It's too bad that it had to happen in the shadow of the digital revolution. OTOH, without the digital world that created the internet, it's unlikely that word of a RF revival and sales of new RF products could have been as successful as they have been.
 
I think it all has to do with Rangefinder being DIFFERENT, so much publicity for this "obsolete" camera system and mainly Leica. Leica is the big winner, I also doubt that cosina Bessa will live long. The leica M7 and MP will stay on the shelves of these exclusive Leica Boutiques, but not many new will actually be produced. Leica progress will not stop at M-E and "M" for sure.
 
Its funny - I just was thinking that Its been a long time since I heard ANYTHING about Zeiss Ikon ZM camera. I remember times when people aften talked about it, but not lately. And the very first thing I see - is this thread that ZM camera is no more. Never had one, but wouldnt mind trying one. But even now - I find it to be way too expensive for what it is. And since it'll not have support soon - I would really expect for it to go much lower. Anyway - its sad news. And it tells me that its unlikely that Zeiss will be working on ZMD. Too bad.
 
Rangefinderfreak said:
I think it all has to do with Rangefinder being DIFFERENT, so much publicity for this "obsolete" camera system and mainly Leica. Leica is the big winner, I also doubt that cosina Bessa will live long. The leica M7 and MP will stay on the shelves of these exclusive Leica Boutiques, but not many new will actually be produced. Leica progress will not stop at M-E and "M" for sure.
Click to expand...


I can't see any reason for Cosina to discontinue the Bessa range. All the development costs are history and they can just keep churning them out as required in whatever quantity satisfies the market.
 
Krosya said:
Its funny - I just was thinking that Its been a long time since I heard ANYTHING about Zeiss Ikon ZM camera. I remember times when people aften talked about it, but not lately. And the very first thing I see - is this thread that ZM camera is no more. Never had one, but wouldnt mind trying one. But even now - I find it to be way too expensive for what it is. And since it'll not have support soon - I would really expect for it to go much lower. Anyway - its sad news. And it tells me that its unlikely that Zeiss will be working on ZMD. Too bad.
Click to expand...

Interesting take on all this: "Way too expensive for what it is."

1/3 the cost of an M7. But ZI is the one that's "way too expensive"? Hmm / . . . 😕
 
Huck Finn said:
Interesting take on all this: "Way too expensive for what it is."

1/3 the cost of an M7. But ZI is the one that's "way too expensive"? Hmm / . . . 😕
Click to expand...

When Zeiss rangefinder was introduced, I tried it. OK the finder was nice and also the film loading. I could not , however escape the feeling that it felt about the same as canon rangefinders, they were also "OK"" but lacked something vital. The feel was somehow "flimsy" like a toy camera. I have a feeling that a serious camera must have some "weight", some "presence".
leica has it, all the way from M3 in 1954, you cannot argue on that. same applies to Bessas, the feeling these cameras is not "serious"...
 
I shot a Zeiss Ikon for a while, I did like much about it except the loading and the wind-on. The loading is certainly slower than an M for me, and the wind-on never felt great. I still have an SW which I use with a 21, and it too has this lack of something in the wind-on. Better tho than any of the Leica viewfinderless models as the SW has a very good meter.

Shame they are gone. I've always thought about giving the RF model another try, hope used prices don;t get too crazy...
 
Rangefinderfreak said:
When Zeiss rangefinder was introduced, I tried it. OK the finder was nice and also the film loading. I could not , however escape the feeling that it felt about the same as canon rangefinders, they were also "OK"" but lacked something vital. The feel was somehow "flimsy" like a toy camera. I have a feeling that a serious camera must have some "weight", some "presence".
leica has it, all the way from M3 in 1954, you cannot argue on that. same applies to Bessas, the feeling these cameras is not "serious"...
Click to expand...

I certainly can argue on that. The "feeling" is just that - a feeling. There's absolutely nothing objective about that. Feelings vary from person to person. And they really have nothing to do with taking good photographs.

I'm glad that a Leica camera works for you. I hope that the $5000 price tag works for you too.

Fact is that the Zeiss Ikon is a superb photographic instrument - objectively better than a Leica M6 or M7 in some ways, i. e. longer effective base line; larger, brighter finder with no flare and less clutter; shorter travel distance for the shutter release button, resulting in quicker response.

With the digital revolution resulting in many smaller, lighter cameras, I'm surprised that we're still talking about the heft of a Leica as an important factor since we've adapted to these smaller, lighter cameras. At this point, even my small Olympus Pen in 4/3 format seems big compared to a lot of what's out there.

It seems to me that what's important about a camera is that it is balanced with all of the components working well together. For example, the shutter release button ona Leica M has to trave 2 mm to activate the shutter. This requires some pressure and the weight of the camera creates just the right balance. In contrast, the shutter release button on the ZI has to travel only 0.3 mm and can be activated with a lighter touch. This too works well with the lighter weight of the ZI. It feels just right.

Obviously a Leica M is a superb photographic instrument, better than a ZI in some ways and superb in its own right.

Te demise of the ZI has to do with the demise of film photography in general. I don't really see it as a reflection on the camera nor an indication that something is lacking in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom