jultou
Established
Too bad they stopped production. I was considering buying one last summer. I did play with one at a store and was very impressed by the viewfinder compared to the M6 and Bessa.
With all the great film camera available used at a good price, I assume that sell high end film camera is not a good business model anymore...
With all the great film camera available used at a good price, I assume that sell high end film camera is not a good business model anymore...
Pioneer
Veteran
Not Leica vs Zeiss
Not Leica vs Zeiss
I hate to break the news, but this really isn't a Leica vs Zeiss vs Bessa thing. It really doesn't matter whether you prefer to work with Leica, Zeiss or Bessa, or something else entirely.
With the demise of the ZI line we have lost an M Mount rangefinder. We lost one of our choices. Losing one of our choices is never a good thing, but we don't have that many film rangefinder choices to begin with so losing one of those few seems a little harder to accept.
I read posts here saying that Bessa may be next. But what about Leica? No one wants to face that possible reality but it is there. If Zeiss can't make money making a quality rangefinder that was built by a Japanese company, at what point will Leica realize that the film rangefinder model is no longer sustainable?
Not Leica vs Zeiss
I hate to break the news, but this really isn't a Leica vs Zeiss vs Bessa thing. It really doesn't matter whether you prefer to work with Leica, Zeiss or Bessa, or something else entirely.
With the demise of the ZI line we have lost an M Mount rangefinder. We lost one of our choices. Losing one of our choices is never a good thing, but we don't have that many film rangefinder choices to begin with so losing one of those few seems a little harder to accept.
I read posts here saying that Bessa may be next. But what about Leica? No one wants to face that possible reality but it is there. If Zeiss can't make money making a quality rangefinder that was built by a Japanese company, at what point will Leica realize that the film rangefinder model is no longer sustainable?
Krosya
Konicaze
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 / . . .
Well, I'm not sure why you immediately go with M7 comparison. Personally, I'm a fan of Konica and very much prefer Hexar RF to Leica and others. Actually the only Leica that agrees with me is my M5.
Since ZI is discontinued and will not be supported for much longer it sort of falls into Hexar RF category and I prefer Hexar, which IS less expensive. That all. Considering everything, to ME it appears that ZI should really be in the same price range as Hexar. But I'm sure you will disagree with this....
I expect that support for the Zeiss Ikon will be provided for at least 5 years or so, so definitely longer than "not much longer".
As for the Hexar RF, I tried to source some parts directly from Kenko Tokina for mine a few years ago when I briefly owned one, and there were already almost none available. The situation will have only gotten worse since then. And with its motor drive etc. there's a lot more that can go wrong with the Hexar RF anyway.
Krosya
Konicaze
Well, sure, Hexar hasnt had support for a long while and there are possible issues, yet having had several of them over the course of few years - they all are still going strong and offer better user for my needs. Plus I can get 2 Hexars for the price of ZI. YMMV
f6andBthere
Well-known
So if Zeiss called a halt to production of the camera ... that is actually manufactured by Cosina, what happens to the tooling?
I suspect a lot of the internals of the Ikon and the Bessa are very similar and as long as the Bessa continues to be manufactured that is good for the Ikon owners who do face an orphaned product eventually.
As pointed out above the real blow is the reduction of choice if you want a new film rangefinder.
I suspect a lot of the internals of the Ikon and the Bessa are very similar and as long as the Bessa continues to be manufactured that is good for the Ikon owners who do face an orphaned product eventually.
As pointed out above the real blow is the reduction of choice if you want a new film rangefinder.
So what's the big deal regarding support then?
As for the price, I can get two Hexars for the price of one ZI, two ZIs for the price of one M7, and two M7s for the price of one MP, but so what. I wouldn't want to shoot with the crappy 0.60x Hexar RF finder anyway
Agreed.
Tzelet
-
My guess would be "when they start losing money making them". But then, they will probably keep making them for a while longer.
As for support, I got faith in Zeiss. They repaired a 40 year old lens for me and had the parts they needed. If it becomes unrepairable at some point (which I'm sure it will), I would have gotten a lot of use out of it.
To me, it is not a camera I would compare to the M7. I know they have the same AE function, but the Ikon is my "Iggy Pop Camera": Light on its feet and in your face. The Leica M's feels totally different, for better and worse. It became a lot easier to appreciate the Ikon for what it is once I stopped blaming it for what it isn't.
Krosya
Konicaze
So what's the big deal regarding support then?
As for the price, I can get two Hexars for the price of one ZI, two ZIs for the price of one M7, and two M7s for the price of one MP, but so what. I wouldn't want to shoot with the crappy 0.60x Hexar RF finder anyway
.
Well, that "crappy" finder is good enough to use with M-Hexanon 50/1.2, which is good enough in my book.
But than again, I never said ZI was a bad camera, just for me it was not worth the money being asked for one.
mfogiel
Veteran
It is a pity they are stopping the production, but let's face it: there is very little market for new film cameras nowadays. If I find it hard to explain to many on this forum the utility of continuing to shoot B&W on film only, then go figure... as this is the main strong point of any film camera left around.
However, Zeiss is foremost an optical powerhouse, and it is more important to the RF community, that they continue to produce the lenses and viewfinders.
Actually, I would not at all be surprised, if this move is a preamble to some digital Zeiss Ikon camera, as the full frame sensors are becoming cheaper, and the microlens technology is out there. An alternative could be, that Sony will come up with a next Nex equipped with a FF sensor capable of handling well the Leica mount lenses, and a decent EVF, as this could also be a natural platform for the LM Zeiss glass.
I continue using:
Zeiss Ikon SW - 12 to 25mm glass, preferably 15
Bessa R4A - 21 to 28mm glass, preferably 28
Zeiss Ikon - 28 to 90mm glass, preferably 35
M7 0.58x - 28 to 35mm glass,preferably 35
M4 - 35 to 90mm glass, preferably 50
M7 0.85x - 50 to 135mm glass, preferably 50 ( I have taken the 75mm frame out)
MP 0.85x - 50 to 135mm glass, preferably 75
I prefer to shoot 85mm and longer on SLR's.
However, Zeiss is foremost an optical powerhouse, and it is more important to the RF community, that they continue to produce the lenses and viewfinders.
Actually, I would not at all be surprised, if this move is a preamble to some digital Zeiss Ikon camera, as the full frame sensors are becoming cheaper, and the microlens technology is out there. An alternative could be, that Sony will come up with a next Nex equipped with a FF sensor capable of handling well the Leica mount lenses, and a decent EVF, as this could also be a natural platform for the LM Zeiss glass.
I continue using:
Zeiss Ikon SW - 12 to 25mm glass, preferably 15
Bessa R4A - 21 to 28mm glass, preferably 28
Zeiss Ikon - 28 to 90mm glass, preferably 35
M7 0.58x - 28 to 35mm glass,preferably 35
M4 - 35 to 90mm glass, preferably 50
M7 0.85x - 50 to 135mm glass, preferably 50 ( I have taken the 75mm frame out)
MP 0.85x - 50 to 135mm glass, preferably 75
I prefer to shoot 85mm and longer on SLR's.
Huck Finn
Well-known
I completely agree with you.
Ten years ago the Hexar filled the mid price niche between the Bessas and Leica. After their demise, ZI emerged to fill the same niche.
Hexar is less expensive simply because it is older and was built when it was cheaper to build. Eventually used ZI's will be cheaper too.
I understand why you prefer a Hexar in that it is more Leica-like in some ways, has more of the Leica feel. It's a very nice camera. I wasn't trying to criticize that. Was just saying that's a personal preference and not really a knock on the Zeiss Ikon.
The Hexar experience is a good example of what has happened in the RF world. Good cameras are introduced, capture some of the market for a while, and then fade away. Leica has the brand that keeps selling and that was true even before digital. Rangefinders are just a tiny niche market with that niche becoming smaller all the time these days.
Huck Finn
Well-known
I completely agree with you.
Ten years ago the Hexar filled the mid price niche between the Bessas and Leica. After their demise, ZI emerged to fill the same niche. I went to the M7 comparison because I was responding to a comment criticizing the ZI for its price tag. Leica is the natural point of comparison when talking high price.
Hexar is less expensive simply because it is older and was built when it was cheaper to build. Eventually used ZI's will be cheaper too.
I understand why you prefer a Hexar in that it is more Leica-like in some ways, has more of the Leica feel. I wasn't trying to criticize that. Was just saying that's a personal preference and not really a knock on the Zeiss Ikon.
The Hexar experience is a good example of what has happened in the RF world. Good cameras are introduced, capture some of the market for a while, and then fade away. Leica has the brand that keeps selling and that was true even before digital. Rangefinders are just a tiny niche market with that niche becoming smaller all the time these days.
Huck Finn
Well-known
None of these cameras are worth the money that's being asked for them. It has to do with economy of scale. Price only comes down when there's enough demand to warrant mass production.
A Teszla electric car isn't worth the money that's being asked for it. But if I want a Teszla, a Zeiss Ikon, or a Leica M7, I have to pay the high price they're asking. That's the economics of a niche market.
Te demise of the ZI is no different that the demise of any of the Nikon or Canon film cameras. Can't get them any more either. ZI has had a 7 year run, which is pretty typical of the life cycle of any camera.
Rangefinderfreak
Well-known
After reading all the posts here, I cannot help the feeling "It is all between the ears"
The whole concept of shooting with a rangefinder is based on the way a guy feels and thinks in his brain. The good part of it is that the bosses of Leica and Cosina are both "rangefinder fans" they will make the money on something else: Mr Kaufmann with his wood & paper mill business, Mr Cosina ( what`s his name?? Koyobashi something...) They both can afford this "lovely hobby" of producing stuff for the concept that should have been dead over twenty years ago.. let`s be happy with this phenomenon.
The whole concept of shooting with a rangefinder is based on the way a guy feels and thinks in his brain. The good part of it is that the bosses of Leica and Cosina are both "rangefinder fans" they will make the money on something else: Mr Kaufmann with his wood & paper mill business, Mr Cosina ( what`s his name?? Koyobashi something...) They both can afford this "lovely hobby" of producing stuff for the concept that should have been dead over twenty years ago.. let`s be happy with this phenomenon.
Huck Finn
Well-known
This thread has me thinking about rangefinder history,
Rangefinders were still common in various forms into the 1970's. By the 1980's, Leica was really the only serious rangefinder brand left standing. Over the last 20 years there have been various attempts to provide an alternative to Leica. Cosina/Voiglander has done a magnificent job of offering cameras and lenses built to a price point.
Each incarnation of equipment over the past 20 years that has attempted to provide a high quality alternative to the Leica M series has been interesting in its own right.
- Contax G AF
- Konica Hexar RF
- Zeiss Ikon
All had great glass that couldn't be found on an SLR camera. All provided great cameras, each with its own attractive advantages.
I'm pessimistic that a new alternative RF system will emerge in the future. How much longer the Leica M system will continue must also be in question.
Rangefinders were still common in various forms into the 1970's. By the 1980's, Leica was really the only serious rangefinder brand left standing. Over the last 20 years there have been various attempts to provide an alternative to Leica. Cosina/Voiglander has done a magnificent job of offering cameras and lenses built to a price point.
Each incarnation of equipment over the past 20 years that has attempted to provide a high quality alternative to the Leica M series has been interesting in its own right.
- Contax G AF
- Konica Hexar RF
- Zeiss Ikon
All had great glass that couldn't be found on an SLR camera. All provided great cameras, each with its own attractive advantages.
I'm pessimistic that a new alternative RF system will emerge in the future. How much longer the Leica M system will continue must also be in question.
botty
Member
I discovered my nearest Zeiss dealer is only 30 minutes drive away so went and had a look (and bought a used ZM body...oops).
He was unaware of any dealer notification of suspension of manufacture.
He was unaware of any dealer notification of suspension of manufacture.
Rangefinderfreak
Well-known
Leica M will "always" be there... If you are into the "Leica culture" you know that the new factory in Wetzlar will start to produce those out of stock parts that the old cameras need. They will be pricey, though.
Another thing is then , what will be the future of Leica S and the other, "consumer" models, I understand there will be a new factory in Portugal, too for these other lines.
And the price of a new leica, everybody is complaining ?
I look at it this way: If we take the M-Monochrom with $ 8000,- price tag. if the life span will be in line with other M leicas it will easily live 20 years. That will be 400 dollars per year. If it has a life span of double that, like my M3 DS, it is only half of that... that is like pocket money...
Pioneer
Veteran
Well with that perspective I guess my pre-war Contax II or my Sears Tower Type 3 will "always" be there as well, since I'm still shooting them and they can still be repaired. I think the point was that "new" rangefinders may have a limited lifespan.
Huck Finn
Well-known
Yeah, why is anyone complaining about the price of a Leica when a Leica S can be had for only $23,000 at the discount houses? LOL.
mfogiel
Veteran
"I look at it this way: If we take the M-Monochrom with $ 8000,- price tag. if the life span will be in line with other M leicas it will easily live 20 years. That will be 400 dollars per year. If it has a life span of double that, like my M3 DS, it is only half of that... that is like pocket money..."
Most digital cameras die soon after the warranty expires, they are designed to do that.
Most digital cameras die soon after the warranty expires, they are designed to do that.