Camera store visit has left me confused about Leica and Zeiss

M

mllanos1111

Well-known
Local time
2:29 PM
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
284
Hi all this is my confusion, I’ve been reading here about Leica’s and Zeiss Ikons etc. I had myself pretty talked into buying an M7, but I wasn’t going to make the plunge until I had a chance to handle both.
I was in L.A. today and stopped buy a large camera store I’m sure you can figure it out since not many stores carry both Leica and Zeiss.
I was trying the M7 and it seemed pretty nice, the viewfinder was good but not OMG good, but much like I remember Leica’s feeling.
Then I picked up the Zeiss and I have to say the viewfinder on it was wonderful, so now I’m thinking the Zeiss is a bargain compared to the M7 and I should get that instead.

The salesman starts talking about the Leica, obviously to him it’s the best camera in the world. He proceeds to tell me that the Zeiss was a poormans Leica and maybe it is, but a poormans Leica with a better viewfinder I’m thinking.
What he said was that Zeiss does not compare because it’s made in Japan not Germany, but he also said that the Zeiss glass does not compare to the Leica glass because it is made in Germany and Leica has never made a lense outside Germany except for one in Canada and that Leica glass will give 100% resolution at all f stops and the Zeiss glass will not, they are only good at maybe f5.6 or f8 on up.
I’ve spent most of my years shooting with SLR’s except for my Rollei 35 and the occasional MF I’ve borrowed, but I’ve never heard anything like this about lenses.
What are your opinions and was this guy just making things up.

Thanks for the input
 
Sounds like you were at Samy Camera....aka "The Evil Empire". I say buy what you like. If the Ikon appeals to you, by all means go for it! You can use both Zeiss and Leica glass as well others. There's been a great deal of talk around here about Leica components being made in countries other Germany. Maybe true...I don't really know. I do know the Zeiss lenses are incredible in terms of image production. So are Leica's. But the camera that feels good. Then experiment with lenses.
 
don't listen to the salesman. You are going to get a lot more informed people here. "Poor man's Leica", eh? That's funny, considering the Zeiss body is, like $1400 or whatever. "Poor man's Leica" HA....what's wrong with being "poor"???? Personally I use Leica M6 bodies and you can get one in excellent condition for the price of a new Zeiss Ikon. But don't let a moron salesman make up your mind for you! While I have chosen to use Leica over the Z.I., look at all the pros and cons; the Leica longevity and robustness vs. that great viewfinder. Will you be able to get the Ikon repaired 10 years from now? Will that matter to you now? Only you can decide.... As for the lenses, the salesman is truly full of BS. Virtually everyone who has used these lenses seriously has reported them to be equal or perhaps better than Leica's offerings. They tend to be bigger than the Leica equivalents, however.
 
mllanos1111 said:
Hi all this is my confusion, I’ve been reading here about Leica’s and Zeiss Ikons etc. I had myself pretty talked into buying an M7, but I wasn’t going to make the plunge until I had a chance to handle both.
I was in L.A. today and stopped buy a large camera store I’m sure you can figure it out since not many stores carry both Leica and Zeiss.
I was trying the M7 and it seemed pretty nice, the viewfinder was good but not OMG good, but much like I remember Leica’s feeling.
Then I picked up the Zeiss and I have to say the viewfinder on it was wonderful, so now I’m thinking the Zeiss is a bargain compared to the M7 and I should get that instead.

The salesman starts talking about the Leica, obviously to him it’s the best camera in the world. He proceeds to tell me that the Zeiss was a poormans Leica and maybe it is, but a poormans Leica with a better viewfinder I’m thinking.
What he said was that Zeiss does not compare because it’s made in Japan not Germany, but he also said that the Zeiss glass does not compare to the Leica glass because it is made in Germany and Leica has never made a lense outside Germany except for one in Canada and that Leica glass will give 100% resolution at all f stops and the Zeiss glass will not, they are only good at maybe f5.6 or f8 on up.
I’ve spent most of my years shooting with SLR’s except for my Rollei 35 and the occasional MF I’ve borrowed, but I’ve never heard anything like this about lenses.
What are your opinions and was this guy just making things up.

Thanks for the input
Click to expand...


Better VF, higher shutter speed, easier film load, price - advantage Zeiss. Build, feel, shutter noise, retention of value - advantage M7. Durability and reliability needs to be seen with both, since also the M7 has electronic components, which were new for a Leica.
Made in Japan versus Germany - think of other products. Generally, it is fair to say that manufacturing standards are highest in Japan. And by the way, once poor man can afford a USD 1200 RF camera, we will live in a better world.
As far as glass is concerned, subscribe to Reid Reviews (online for about USD 30 or so pa) to read excellent comparisons of Leica, Zeiss and Voigtlaender lenses - the Zeiss lenses are as good as the Leica ones.
And lastly, find a good camera store with competent sales people.


:D
 
retow said:
And lastly, find a good camera store with competent sales people.
:D
Click to expand...

A camera store that will have in stock and let you handle the Zeiss Ikon and Leica cameras....and maybe a Bessa....NEAR IMPOSSIBLE to find. Maybe in LA or NYC. Nowhere else in the WORLD!!! (Maybe Hong Kong or Tokyo??....London???)
 
In the first place, the camera salesperson is full of it!

Given the considerable price difference between them the ZM is indeed worth considering.

Other than price your primary considerations should be (IMO):

(1) The Ikon shutter is 100% battery dependent (the M7 has back-up manual speeds of 60 and 125);
(2) The Ikon RF patch whites out very easily unless your eye is square in the finder - the M7 is not so fickle (spend about ten minutes with both cameras and you will see what I'm talking about); and
(3) The M7 shutter is more robust compared to the Ikon.

As to the glass, no reasonably informed person should be able to knock ZM lenses compared to Leica. They are comparable in virtually every respect, except price.
 
FrankS said:
Just remember that you were talking to a salesman! :)
Click to expand...

I agree.

Make your own choice here and go there and buy it. Else you might be buying what they can't sell or what somebody else thinks.

Samuel
 
mllanos1111 said:
The salesman starts talking about the Leica, obviously to him it’s the best camera in the world. He proceeds to tell me that the Zeiss was a poormans Leica and maybe it is, but a poormans Leica with a better viewfinder I’m thinking.
What he said was that Zeiss does not compare because it’s made in Japan not Germany, but he also said that the Zeiss glass does not compare to the Leica glass because it is made in Germany and Leica has never made a lense outside Germany except for one in Canada and that Leica glass will give 100% resolution at all f stops and the Zeiss glass will not, they are only good at maybe f5.6 or f8 on up.
I’ve spent most of my years shooting with SLR’s except for my Rollei 35 and the occasional MF I’ve borrowed, but I’ve never heard anything like this about lenses.
What are your opinions and was this guy just making things up.
Click to expand...

This is why I don't bother asking salespeople any questions any more. They lie about as often as politicians. If they are "knowledgable" they just repeat what they read in the magazines (which are equally useless), otherwise you get crap like "Leica glass will give 100% resolution at all f stops". What the hell is that even supposed to mean?

Leica lenses are generally very good. So are the ZMs. (some ZM's art considered to be better than the equivalent Leica.

I expect the Leica feels nicer than the ZI. The Leica oooozes niceness. Whether this is worth the money to you depends. The ZI with ZM or Leica lenses will take excellent pictures, as will the M7.

colin
 
Although I am a Leica addict (but not of the M7), I would suspect that the store may be making more profit from selling Leica than Zeiss equipment. Do some research on what others think and make up your own mind.

Richard
 
Keep in mind that the Zeiss Ikon's shutter is much noisier than the M7's, but the Ikon is significantly lighter.

If noise levels aren't a concern I dont think you could go too far wrong with either.
 
BillBlackwell said:
(2) The Ikon RF patch whites out very easily unless your eye is square in the finder - the M7 is not so fickle (spend about ten minutes with both cameras and you will see what I'm talking about);
Click to expand...

That's the main reason I traded my Ikon, I couldn't stand having to center my eye in the finder for each shot and it cost me lots of good shot opportunities.
Sometimes I wonder if I should've persisted, maybe there's a trick to bringing the camera up to your eye without having to move the viewfinder around each time?
I still wouldn't recommend that camera for fast street shooting where shots come and go in (pardon the pun) the blink of an eye though.
 
as for the noise i think you are overstating it by writing "much" and underlining it. a bit is more like to my ears.

as for the VF, well it does have to suit you. but bear in mind some very good photogs here at RFF are finding away to take great street shots with their ZIs.

i am huge L body fan, having a couple, but i have to say the ZI body is just gorgeous; don't mistake its lighter weight for a lack of toughness; it has to do with using light and strong materials. the tank leica feel is great, but this is just a different feel.

aesthetically, one cool thing about the ZI is that there is no red dot on it; i wonder why L ever did that....ah the woe of changing for....change's sake?
 
Pablito said:
A camera store that will have in stock and let you handle the Zeiss Ikon and Leica cameras....and maybe a Bessa....NEAR IMPOSSIBLE to find. Maybe in LA or NYC. Nowhere else in the WORLD!!! (Maybe Hong Kong or Tokyo??....London???)
Click to expand...


There's one in Sydney.
 
Ok, I tried both. Of course, leica is amazing, no doubt. But I felt at home with the ZI. Reasons: the viewfinder, the feel, the price. Popflash was very helpful to me. They are in LA somewhere. The sound of the shutter is quiet enought that I could shoot a guy lieing down on a bench without disturbing him. Good enough for me.
185314260-S.jpg

Shot with the Sonnar 50mm f1.5 at 2.8
 
Last edited:
I used to work at a camera store and considering his burning Zeiss atittude, they must be making more on the leica. And hoping to get you to spend more money.

My advise: don't go back to that store!

On camera choise.. Take what your hand likes to hold and handle.

Lenses are the next issue thankfully both of these nice camera's have the same lensmount. :) If your really poor(like me ;-) ) buy a Voigtlander Bessa.. And save up for the lenses!
 
As others have said, the salesman was full of it. Personally, if I was looking at the two, I would go with the Zeiss, mostly because that money can be used it lots of other places. Pick whichever lenses suit you...it's ok to mix brands!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom