I think I'm drunken..

italy74

Well-known
Local time
8:51 AM
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
804
Location
Northern Italy
Well,
I was pretty sure to have posted here also the excitement to go this afternoon to Modena to try and handle a Zeiss Ikon, some ZM and ZF lenses with a friend.. It will be my first time with Zeiss stuff.

Who knows where the hell have I posted such thread... 😕 😕 😕
 
Last edited:
Hi guys
so, I'm back here and this is what I could find out.

Overall, the classic "coup de foudre", or "spark" there hasn't been, I mean that kind of feeling that makes you able to forget every cons you find, but I have also to explain what happened.

Today was a wonderful day to go out and stroll, both for weather, lighting and sun. Modena was FULL of handsome girls strolling down the historical center. But this comes after, you know!

When I arrived to the photo center, the man showed me the Ikon and the 35 mm and boy, I would have purchased it immediately ! What a beautifully crafted camera it is! And the 35 mm was really a joy to handle. silvered metal... Handling it, I discovered two important things:
1) The viewfinder is effectively large and bright as you couldn't imagine and the lens I immediately saw on it was exactly the 35 mm. I looked also, by turning the front lever, the 28 and the 50 mm but with the 28 I lost all the space around the lines (keep in mind I wear glasses, so frame lines looked REALLY close to the side of the frame) while the 35mm fit my taste much better. So, if I'd ever take one, I know which lens I have to choose.

2) Focusing patch. Well.. Aside the different way compared to my F6 where there are also microprisms, split lines etc, it was a bit cumbersome for me matching the two images, because the patch looked quite little (and this is only the beginning) and rather (see later) more transparent that I would have expected.
The other "cons" I found (comparing it with my SLR way to shoot) was the fact that if I want to focus on a certain point which is not the center, I'm forced to focus in the middle and then recompose, which means losing time. This, again, will be discussed later.
On the positive side, the Zeiss ZM 35 mm was really a joy to focus, nothing to complain, here.
If you allow me such comparison, it looks like a metal brick, much sturdier and solid looking even than my F6, and heavier than expected.

So here we comes, when I asked the man if i could borrow for the afternoon, he denied, but I expected this answer. Of course, serious collectors would have checked such Ikon thouroughsly if they want to get one, and much deeper than me that - I told him at once - I just wanted to see how rf cameras were and if rangefinder could fit my shooting style. However, he was kind and borrowed me a Hexar RF with (!) a Summicron 35 F/2, extremely compact, much more than the Zeiss counterpart. I thanked him more for the lens than for the camera which however was quite easy to use.
Due to the beautiful weather, I "risked" and loaded a Velvia 50 roll to scrutinize it deeply under the lens, after.

So with my friend Giorgio we started strolling along the historical center of Modena and now and then I stopped and shot.
What I noticed again, from the beginning, were two things:
1) the Leica lens, despite excellent optically and with a great build, was SO compact that turning the small focusing ring (encased between two larger rings) was not so good as Zeiss, and this despite the finger tool Leica put on it. I would have preferred to grab it more securely on two points on the dial than just using the fingertip.
2) Again, the focus and recompose thing. If you're used to SLR which can focus on different points, it's really slowing down things, especially if you have also to mind about frame lines. Probably, with the Zeiss lens, I'd have gained half second for each shot, but it's just speculation.

This is also important because if on one hand I felt to be for sure more "stealthy" at once, on the other and, I lost too much time before shooting and this is not good because you lose your camouflage just after a few seconds you're standing in front of people. Using the 28 mm (assumed he had one) would have put me in a SLR-like environment, but I was there to test the RF one (with space outside the framelines)

I have to add that Hexar had a larger and more contrasty focusing patch, but it was probably misaligned since some lines didn't match at infinity.

However, we visited the Dome, had an ice cream and strolled again... It was a long time I didn't see so many beautiful girls all together... Modena wasn't loved by Goethe for nothing, I'd say!

When we came back to the shop, it was quite unfortunate I hadn't enough time to borrow also a ZF lens and "redo" the trip with my F6 which remained in the shop as "guarantee deposit" while the Hexar was out.

Bottom line, kudos to Zeiss for the build quality of their lenses. Actually, I have to think quite a lot about getting one, but at least know I discovered which its (or mine) limits were.
 
Last edited:
Interesting report. There is a bit of an adjustment going from a SLR to a rangefinder. I'm curious. Do you use AF a lot of your F6? I think DOF often covers any difference in focusing when one focuses and recomposes. The DOF scale on a manual prime lens focus lens gives you an idea of the DOF. Of course the closer you are to the subject and the lower the f-stop number, the more difficult it is to focus and recompose. I suspect you will quickly adjust to using the rangefinder and manual focus lenses.

willie
 
Hi William
you're right, so I used as much as possible hyperfocal focusing and so on to "speed up" things, but differently from slr where if you focus you can see on the whole screen where you're in focus, not only on the central patch / sensor, with the Hexar I was forced to use the rangefinder patch and couldn't do in any other way. Just imagine, in the time I had spotted someone interesting, focused on him/her and recomposed, he/she had already moved.. Or I have to ignore whatever is beyond 5 meters (that was my limit on the focusing scale, just before infinite mark) otherwise it's just a guessing. For what I could, I tried to keep the lens at its best which usually is F/4 - F/5.6 - sometimes also at F/8 but since I had a 50 iso roll, I had to verify each time how much light there was, especially in the shadows.
However... don't worry, I'll get one sooner or later, it was really a beautiful camera!
 
grazie dino!

thank you for your nice report.
it reminded me of the time when i learned to use RF cameras, coming from nikon, too - the difference of course is: i came from FM2 (so, not used to autofocus), and my RF was a leica IIIc.
as soon as i found my way into it, i actually preferred the rangefinder way of taking pictures.

with the SLR, i was used to compose the pictures in the finder - with the RF, this changed to previsualising the picture in my mind, and using the finder only as a confirmation that the camera would take the pic i had in mind.

of course, i made use of this style of picture taking with the SLR too (later), but the RF just proved to offer the better tool for me, being less bulky, and more direct (more direct in every way).

so, my comment is: you should not expect to "master" the rangefinder camera immediately. it will take more time than one afternoon - alone to learn the different directions for almost every dial (open/close aperture, change focusing distance is the opposite direction compared to the nikon) takes quite some time.

cheers,
sebastian
 
Last edited:
Ciao Sebastian

well, the truth is that I knew that an afternoon it wouldn't be enough to learn: I was much more concerning about WHAT I should have had to improve / worry, and here I was successful, meaning that I undestood which were the actual limits between me and the camera. Some of them were for sure depending on the lens focus ring (and this can be avoided in the future, by choosing another lens), others are more difficult to "solve" but hey, when I got my first NON program camera (F80) I was much more worried !!! Learning is just on the way...
Of course, in my ACTUAL situation (monthly home loan of about 1100€) I would have been crazy to get it at once, but at least I had the opportunity to see how it feels / handle.
 
Dino, a cheaper entry into the rf world would be with a Minolta CLE+ 40/2 Rokkor or Summicron lens - apparently the Rokkor is actually better and also cheaper. You can also get the 28/3.5 Skopar for it to cover the 28mm. I have bought this camera through the RFF a month ago and I enjoy it a lot - it is tiny, and the VF is ok (and you can see easily the 28mm frames) for someone using glasses. As to focusing with a rangefinder - well it might look slower at the beginning, but once you understand how it works, it is actually faster than anything else including autofocus cameras, and as a bonus your framing will improve dramatically too. On a final note: I have never used anything so rewarding in terms of output quality as the Zeiss Ikon with the 35/2 Biogon - just remember to shoot around f4.0 to keep the shutter speed on the high side, and the results will be impressive...
 
Back
Top Bottom