mgb
Newbie
Cheers,
Having collected some experience with a range finder camera (a Kiev 4) I am very much interested in continuing this approach to photography with a ZI or Leica range finder camera. Well the Kiev mainly served me for finding out whether I would like to work with Rangefinders or not and indeed this is the case.
Now although the rangefinder of the ZI, Cosina and Leica with frame lines the same principles from the practioneers point of view there are several differences that are worth consideration. In my case I am not sure whether I should choose a body with an extra 75mm frame line. With my experience with the Kiev and the 85mm Jupiter9 I think that this lens is often too long for the street work I am thinking in at the moment. Then on the other hand I am interested in using more the wide angle lenses, starting with a 35mm one and as a second lens the ZM25mm. (Folks clearly I love CZ-lenses having a 'blad and a Contax SRL at my disposal). The trade of then is to by a used Leica M4-P or M6 or opt for the new ZI. Regarding the camera I do not want to spend more than 1000€.
Although it is of course best to compare the cameras side by side and to reach my own decision, this also may take more time than one has and sometimes the evaluation changes with the experience.
As this is a trade off, I 'd like to know what the experience here :
How good are the range finders of the ZI and M4-P/M6 to frame with a ZM25mm?
How good is the metering system in the ZI (meter characteristics) or M6 ?
I ask this as good used M4-P bodies can be bought at a good price already and I am used to hand held meters e.g. with the Hasselblad (yes, you can use that system for quick hand held fotography too). Coming with the addition of the A mode I would probably prefer the ZI when comes to a metered body as it has also the higher flash sync time (which I'll seldomly use with this type of camera though). Does anyone have a clue what angle is roughly covered by the grey area of the shutter curtain let's say for a 35mm lens? (With my SLR I can chose between Spot and average metering, a typical hand held meter cover 30º). Well, if for example in situations like a crowded street the metering may not be very reliable (better its quality forseeible) I could decide for a less exepnsive meterless body.
looking forward to your advice
cheers,
Michel.
Having collected some experience with a range finder camera (a Kiev 4) I am very much interested in continuing this approach to photography with a ZI or Leica range finder camera. Well the Kiev mainly served me for finding out whether I would like to work with Rangefinders or not and indeed this is the case.
Now although the rangefinder of the ZI, Cosina and Leica with frame lines the same principles from the practioneers point of view there are several differences that are worth consideration. In my case I am not sure whether I should choose a body with an extra 75mm frame line. With my experience with the Kiev and the 85mm Jupiter9 I think that this lens is often too long for the street work I am thinking in at the moment. Then on the other hand I am interested in using more the wide angle lenses, starting with a 35mm one and as a second lens the ZM25mm. (Folks clearly I love CZ-lenses having a 'blad and a Contax SRL at my disposal). The trade of then is to by a used Leica M4-P or M6 or opt for the new ZI. Regarding the camera I do not want to spend more than 1000€.
Although it is of course best to compare the cameras side by side and to reach my own decision, this also may take more time than one has and sometimes the evaluation changes with the experience.
As this is a trade off, I 'd like to know what the experience here :
How good are the range finders of the ZI and M4-P/M6 to frame with a ZM25mm?
How good is the metering system in the ZI (meter characteristics) or M6 ?
I ask this as good used M4-P bodies can be bought at a good price already and I am used to hand held meters e.g. with the Hasselblad (yes, you can use that system for quick hand held fotography too). Coming with the addition of the A mode I would probably prefer the ZI when comes to a metered body as it has also the higher flash sync time (which I'll seldomly use with this type of camera though). Does anyone have a clue what angle is roughly covered by the grey area of the shutter curtain let's say for a 35mm lens? (With my SLR I can chose between Spot and average metering, a typical hand held meter cover 30º). Well, if for example in situations like a crowded street the metering may not be very reliable (better its quality forseeible) I could decide for a less exepnsive meterless body.
looking forward to your advice
cheers,
Michel.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
depends on YOUR shooting style and if you want a new gadget (ZI) or something built to the toughest standards (Leica).
The Leica is a legend, what more do you need to know? You're comparing a Miata (ZI) to a Ferrari.
The Leica is a legend, what more do you need to know? You're comparing a Miata (ZI) to a Ferrari.
Dougg
Seasoned Member
Hi, and welcome to RFF, Michel! I can sympathize with your decision problem. Rather than a Miata/Ferrarri contrast, I'd suggest the Leica/ZI difference is more like a used Rolls vs a new Bentley. 
I've long had an M2, and also have the ZI, though not the cars. <g> The Zeiss Ikon deserves its name. I agree with you the AE is s nice reason to favor a built-in meter, otherwise I'd actually prefer a separate hand-held meter, incident reading.
The Zeiss Ikon has an unmatched view/rangefinder, but neither it nor any M Leica have 25mm framelines. So there, you are faced with using either a top-mounted accessory viewfinder for framing, or estimating based on the entire window of the camera. The only interchangeable-lens RF camera with wider frames is the Voigtlander Bessa R4 due next Spring (in both AE and manual versions) with framelines for 21, 25, 28, 35, and 50mm... unique in the market, this has never before been done.
I think your choice of 25mm plus 35mm for the street is a fine combination. And of course this means you will be very close to your subjects. This is something many of us have had to work on (and keep working on); breaking into someone else's "space" in an acceptable way.
I've long had an M2, and also have the ZI, though not the cars. <g> The Zeiss Ikon deserves its name. I agree with you the AE is s nice reason to favor a built-in meter, otherwise I'd actually prefer a separate hand-held meter, incident reading.The Zeiss Ikon has an unmatched view/rangefinder, but neither it nor any M Leica have 25mm framelines. So there, you are faced with using either a top-mounted accessory viewfinder for framing, or estimating based on the entire window of the camera. The only interchangeable-lens RF camera with wider frames is the Voigtlander Bessa R4 due next Spring (in both AE and manual versions) with framelines for 21, 25, 28, 35, and 50mm... unique in the market, this has never before been done.
I think your choice of 25mm plus 35mm for the street is a fine combination. And of course this means you will be very close to your subjects. This is something many of us have had to work on (and keep working on); breaking into someone else's "space" in an acceptable way.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Joe has the ZM 25, so can speak to using it on the ZI. I seem to recall he doesn't use the external finder, but maybe I'm wrong.
SDK
Exposing since 1969.
While Dougg is right for critical framing, there is no M-mount camera yet on the market with 25mm brightframes, I have used the 25mm Biogon ZM without extra VF with several 0.58X-0.6X wideangle findered cameras (Leica M6-TTL, M7 and MP are available with optional 0.58X finder, Konica Hexar RF with standard 0.6X finder). You can use the entire VF on these bodies with decent accuracy for the 25mm. The ZI has a bigger finder that also approximately shows the view of 25mm. This works well unless you are very close to the subject, which is where any external finder also gets inaccurate. Zeiss and Voigtländer external finders are the best available.
The M4-P can't work without an extra finder because it only came with a standard 0.72X finder, and even the edges of the 28mm framelines are hard to see. Ditto for any standard M2/M4/M6/M7/MP finder. I just bought an used M4-P and immediately had to have it cleaned/lubed/adjusted because the finder was cloudy, RF patch was off vertically and horizontally and low speeds were unreliable. Now $219 later it works like a charm. So factor in $200 or more for service, unless you find an M4-P that was recently CLAed or is guaranteed by a camera shop to be clean and fully working. I also had to get a bottom plate for my M4-P which came with a motor only, and it fits a bit too snugly. Apparently the older Leicas were made to less precise tolerances than modern M cameras like the later M6 TTL/M7/MP.
If you can find an M6 TTL 0.58X, that is close in price to that of a new ZI, that would be the closest used Leica in terms of performance and cost to the Zeiss. Though lacking AUTO exposure, it does have TTL flash which is much better than auto flash control. These are newish cameras and very well made in Germany on more modern equipment than the Canadian made M4-P. I never had any trouble with my M6-TTL, but decided I wanted the autoexposure and more accurate shutter of the M7.
The ZM 25mm lens is one of the best wideangles ever made. It has great resolution, high contrast, low flare, nice smooth OOF (out of focus) rendition, low distortion and gorgeous smooth color and tonality reproduction.
Here are some 25mm Shots of mine:
Street Altercation (Finder free chest height shot).
Fisherman's Friends, Stonington, Maine
South View from the Devil's Courthouse, Pisgah National Forest
South View from the Mount Pisgah Trailhead
The M4-P can't work without an extra finder because it only came with a standard 0.72X finder, and even the edges of the 28mm framelines are hard to see. Ditto for any standard M2/M4/M6/M7/MP finder. I just bought an used M4-P and immediately had to have it cleaned/lubed/adjusted because the finder was cloudy, RF patch was off vertically and horizontally and low speeds were unreliable. Now $219 later it works like a charm. So factor in $200 or more for service, unless you find an M4-P that was recently CLAed or is guaranteed by a camera shop to be clean and fully working. I also had to get a bottom plate for my M4-P which came with a motor only, and it fits a bit too snugly. Apparently the older Leicas were made to less precise tolerances than modern M cameras like the later M6 TTL/M7/MP.
If you can find an M6 TTL 0.58X, that is close in price to that of a new ZI, that would be the closest used Leica in terms of performance and cost to the Zeiss. Though lacking AUTO exposure, it does have TTL flash which is much better than auto flash control. These are newish cameras and very well made in Germany on more modern equipment than the Canadian made M4-P. I never had any trouble with my M6-TTL, but decided I wanted the autoexposure and more accurate shutter of the M7.
The ZM 25mm lens is one of the best wideangles ever made. It has great resolution, high contrast, low flare, nice smooth OOF (out of focus) rendition, low distortion and gorgeous smooth color and tonality reproduction.
Here are some 25mm Shots of mine:
Street Altercation (Finder free chest height shot).
Fisherman's Friends, Stonington, Maine
South View from the Devil's Courthouse, Pisgah National Forest
South View from the Mount Pisgah Trailhead
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
greetings michel!
i have the zi and use the zm 25 without an external finder. it is doable. i use the entire field of view and then some and it sems to work out well.
the zi has a basic but somehow very accurate meter. i shoot only b&w film so that helps i would think.
i have had a m4-p and an m3 in the past and they were great cameras.
the zi is also a great camera but different from the leica experience.
i like both but wanted new this time around so i opted to go with the zeiss.
the zm lenses are phenominal, the 25 is scary sharp.
i have the zi and use the zm 25 without an external finder. it is doable. i use the entire field of view and then some and it sems to work out well.
the zi has a basic but somehow very accurate meter. i shoot only b&w film so that helps i would think.
i have had a m4-p and an m3 in the past and they were great cameras.
the zi is also a great camera but different from the leica experience.
i like both but wanted new this time around so i opted to go with the zeiss.
the zm lenses are phenominal, the 25 is scary sharp.
Nachkebia
Well-known
I did my whole india trip with 25mm and ZI (no external viewfinder) without any problems with compositing (while shooting and later seeng resault)
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
the 25 vs 28 is almost immaterial so I would simply use the outer 28mm framelines. Think out of the box.
Best - Paul
Best - Paul
back alley
IMAGES
what are you meaning by immaterial paul?
just to check, i bought a cv 25 finder with the brightlines and checked it against the 28 framelines and the outer fov of the finder.
i was surprised to see just how much i missed in my estimation of the top and bottom of the frame.
the sides were ok but i needed to add more air to the top/bottom.
just to check, i bought a cv 25 finder with the brightlines and checked it against the 28 framelines and the outer fov of the finder.
i was surprised to see just how much i missed in my estimation of the top and bottom of the frame.
the sides were ok but i needed to add more air to the top/bottom.
SDK
Exposing since 1969.
35mmdelux said:
No, the difference is substantial. I strongly disagree that 25mm is immaterially different in view to a 28mm. 25mm is significantly wider and takes in quite a bit more life than a 28mm. I own and use both focal lengths.
mgb
Newbie
Thanks to all for the information. Steve, the sample pictures you posted are gorgeous. I like the way you did the group shots. This is how I would use a wide angle lens for street fotography. I would also use this and the 35mm lens to portrait people in their environment, e.g. a street merchant with his stand etc. In this way one is not intruding much, which I would not like to do. I have used a 28mm lens in similar situations.
Regarding the finder the hint to the 0.56/0.6 finders of the LEICA M6 etc and of the Konica is a good hint. I had the opportunity to look at a Konica Hexar R once, but the current situation with Konica ... Minolta ... being now a part of Sony is not really recommending purchasing this one.
Well , at the Leica pages they have representations of the viewfinders with frame lines (the M a la carte configurator section) and indeed your statement about the Leica finder is plausible. With the 0.72 finder I won't be happy. Your expierience/reports on the ZI are encouraging. Do you miss much at the top or bottom when taking the outerframe or do you rather have to go closer to the 28mm frame lines.
As to the larger field of view of the 25mm it add 7% left and right to the 28mm frame. This is quite a lot when it comes to the border of a wide angle less. Besides that the 25mm lens is considered a very nice lens.
No let's see whether I find an inexpeinsive well-used M6 or whether I rather choose the ZI (will be able to see one in January). This will also settle the issue
Regarding the finder the hint to the 0.56/0.6 finders of the LEICA M6 etc and of the Konica is a good hint. I had the opportunity to look at a Konica Hexar R once, but the current situation with Konica ... Minolta ... being now a part of Sony is not really recommending purchasing this one.
Well , at the Leica pages they have representations of the viewfinders with frame lines (the M a la carte configurator section) and indeed your statement about the Leica finder is plausible. With the 0.72 finder I won't be happy. Your expierience/reports on the ZI are encouraging. Do you miss much at the top or bottom when taking the outerframe or do you rather have to go closer to the 28mm frame lines.
As to the larger field of view of the 25mm it add 7% left and right to the 28mm frame. This is quite a lot when it comes to the border of a wide angle less. Besides that the 25mm lens is considered a very nice lens.
No let's see whether I find an inexpeinsive well-used M6 or whether I rather choose the ZI (will be able to see one in January). This will also settle the issue
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
SDK said:
The diff is 9%. If that is substantial to you fine. Granted the 25mm provides more horizontal and vertical info. I'd rather estimate and not figid with external accessories, which slow down the shooting process. YMMV
fuwen
Well-known
As for 25mm vs 28mm, other than the frame lines, I always find that the 28mm is wide but still have a natural perspective, whereas the 25mm has a stronger character and makes the photo very different from the 28mm. YMMV, IMHO etc etc
SDK
Exposing since 1969.
35mmdelux said:
My math does vary, 25mm lenses capture 74 degrees horizontal view to the 28mm bringing in 65 degrees. Perhaps you meant degrees difference instead of percent difference. The focal length difference is that 25mm is 86% (-14%) of 28mm. Sorry to be a nerd about that.
9 degrees may not seem very different close up, but the angle difference is big real estate in landscape/cityscape use, and perspective is more noticeable in 25mm shots, often becoming an element of the picture itself.Practically, I agree that not having an extra finder is preferable 90% of the time, which is why Zeiss Ikons, Hexar RFs and 0.58X finder Leicas are probably the best choices now for the Zeiss 25mm ZM lens. Frankly, I think the 0.72X Leica finders are pretty poor for 28mm's too, and I find my self having to actively move my eye around a lot to see all the corners of the 28mm framelines on those. The Hexar RF is not great for 28mm either due to the missing frameline down the left hand side where shutter speeds are displayed. I usually use 28mm on my 0.58X M7, a great match in my experience. I've heard the Ikon is good for 28mm too.
I may be wrong, but I think one reason 35mm focal length lenses are popular with Leica users is the ease of using the 35mm framelines in a 0.72X finder. With a 0.58X finder, the 28mm framelines are in about that same location.
Sorry for the pedantry! I'm rather biased toward wideangles!
mgb
Newbie
cheers,
Steven, I think we both agree on the 14% regarding the additional horizontal (or vertical) field of view, i.e. 7% more on on each of the lines of the 28mm frame each. 9% is not correct. The angles of the two lenses given in the Zeiss leaflets is (25mm) 82º|72º|52º and (28mm) 75º|65º|46º (diag.|horiz.|vert.)
For a picture shot at a distance of 5m the 25mm covers a field of view of 7.2m horizontally (vertically 4.9m) and the 28mm 6.3m (4.2m) . To cover the same field of view with the 28mm lense you have to take the photo at a distance of 5.7m.
Now, while being limited in space the extra 1m may be important, you might say that you can step back other wise. But this is not so much my point. My interest in this lens is that the perspective of this lense is different, i.e. the sizes of close by and far away objects. I think this is shown by the photos of Steve and of others posted in this forum. At least this is my perception of the pictures and my interest in the formidable ZI25mm rather than the 28mm lens comes from this aspect. fuwen, thank you for pointing this out. This really confirmed my thinking on this issue.
Is there any one how can comment on the meter issue in comparison of M6 with the ZI?
cheers,
Michel.
Steven, I think we both agree on the 14% regarding the additional horizontal (or vertical) field of view, i.e. 7% more on on each of the lines of the 28mm frame each. 9% is not correct. The angles of the two lenses given in the Zeiss leaflets is (25mm) 82º|72º|52º and (28mm) 75º|65º|46º (diag.|horiz.|vert.)
For a picture shot at a distance of 5m the 25mm covers a field of view of 7.2m horizontally (vertically 4.9m) and the 28mm 6.3m (4.2m) . To cover the same field of view with the 28mm lense you have to take the photo at a distance of 5.7m.
Now, while being limited in space the extra 1m may be important, you might say that you can step back other wise. But this is not so much my point. My interest in this lens is that the perspective of this lense is different, i.e. the sizes of close by and far away objects. I think this is shown by the photos of Steve and of others posted in this forum. At least this is my perception of the pictures and my interest in the formidable ZI25mm rather than the 28mm lens comes from this aspect. fuwen, thank you for pointing this out. This really confirmed my thinking on this issue.
Is there any one how can comment on the meter issue in comparison of M6 with the ZI?
cheers,
Michel.
Nachkebia
Well-known
If M6 has same meter as M7 I can comment, from my experiance Zeiss ikon meter is configure for slides, which means on black and white it overexposed almost freaquantly, as for M7 when I shoot with slide I do +1 or +2, on zeiss ikon if I shoot black and white I compansate -1 or -2 (depends of film)
mgb
Newbie
Cheers,
Vlad, this is a very intresting observation. I usually underexpose slide films by 0.5 f-stop.
I had a look at your pictures from India. Wonderful captures, I envy you for the india trip.
I like the way you compose with the 25mm lense very much.
The light in your scences must have been difficult. Did you use the AE-lock often or did you shoot right away after composing?
In some of the pictures a center circle appears that is surrounded by a border being much darker. Did you introduce this effect intentionally or is this due to underexposing the slide film by which the effect of the lenses light fall off towards the corners becomes visible?
cheers,
Michel.
Vlad, this is a very intresting observation. I usually underexpose slide films by 0.5 f-stop.
I had a look at your pictures from India. Wonderful captures, I envy you for the india trip.
I like the way you compose with the 25mm lense very much.
The light in your scences must have been difficult. Did you use the AE-lock often or did you shoot right away after composing?
In some of the pictures a center circle appears that is surrounded by a border being much darker. Did you introduce this effect intentionally or is this due to underexposing the slide film by which the effect of the lenses light fall off towards the corners becomes visible?
cheers,
Michel.
thafred
silver addict
I would go for a cheap M4/M6 camera simply because they come 200-400 cheaper on the used marked as a new ZI (they don´t come up often, at least in europe) ... I got my M6 for 700€ wich is 500 cheaper than a ZI (1200€ last time I checked!) and this camera rocks for sure! also you say you don´t need a meter so obviously AE isn´t on the priorities, so got for M6!! (you can have a Planar or old Cron plus M6/4 for the price of an ZI! )
For framing you have to get the external VF but at least you´ll have framelines for the 25 then and can see around the frames too! (that´s a big handicap for full VF wa photography imho)
)For framing you have to get the external VF but at least you´ll have framelines for the 25 then and can see around the frames too! (that´s a big handicap for full VF wa photography imho)