Is there much of a point in seeking out a better camera?

tunalegs

tunalegs

Pretended Artist
Local time
10:49 PM
Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Messages
2,619
I have been relatively well satisfied by my Zorki 4, but find myself looking at other cameras and lenses frequently. Then when I'm about 90% sure I'm ready to pay good money for a more refined machine or more exotic lens - I don't.

I got a Zorki 4k which has a rapid winding lever, but that's about it in terms of improvements. I've looked at other RF cameras, I took a long hard look at a Leica IIIg for a very good price, but walked away. My friend lent me his IIIf, and though beautifully made it offers no real advantage over the Zorki so far as I can see. I've also looked at Japanese LTM cameras - but in each case as soon as I've decided I want it, I decide not to get it.

The one thing that bothers me in the back of my mind about my Zorki is its lack of 100% perfect compatibility with LTM lenses from Germany or Japan. The Jupiter 8 is a nice lens, but if I'm only going to use one lens then why have an interchangeable lens rangefinder anyway? There are frankly plenty of better fixed lens RF cameras out there available for as little or less than a decent Zorki.

I suppose when I get down to it, the Zorki works fine and the lens is good enough that the whole package is satisfactory. I look at other lenses - but think about how much more will all that extra cost actually get me? I look at other cameras and in many cases I would be paying a lot more for a camera that isn't really much better (or any better) in a practical sense. It is a perfectly capable camera. But its relationship to similar cameras means I am always comparing it to those other machines.

Is there anything out there in the LTM world that is seriously worth pursuing? Or is the Zorki 4 good enough to really be satisfactorily good enough? Having spent a lot of time looking at and using LTM Leicas and their direct clones, I'm left thinking that possibly the only thing that may really be worth it is one of the later more advanced Canon LTM cameras.

Or maybe I will be happy enough forever with a Zorki and a Jupiter.
 
Here is an idea!

The Voigtlander Bessa R has a Leica thread mount, it also has user selectable frame lines and a built in light meter.

Average price used, around 175-225$

I'd say everything about the Bessa trumps your Zorki.
 
It is understood there are many cameras which are better in this or that way - the question is whether they're better enough to be worth paying for.
 
Some cameras are nicer to use than others. That's about it. I suppose you could add that some lenses are better than others, too. If you can live with the "poker through ballbearings" feel of the Zorkii and the image quality of the 50/2 Jupiter, and if they give you the pictures you want, you'd be a fool to buy anything else. If you want "knife through butter", better ergonomics and other lenses, yeah, why not buy something else? Only you can decide whether the price is worth it. If a Leica is the price of an evening out, as it might be for one person, then the effective price/value is different than it would be for the person for whom it's a month's groceries.

Cheers,

R.
 
What Roger said + if the Zorki just works for you, I don't see any reason for a change. I have had quite a few FSU cameras that worked nicely for a start, but soon developed problems. In the end I bought a Canon P which works nicely with all my FSU glass.
 
When people ask my why I don't have a mobile phone, I tell them that I don't need one.
Keep using what you have until you need something else.
 
Well, for me it comes down to whether you are more of an artist and photographer or more of a gear head. If you like the images you get from your Zorki, they satisfy you and you have fun using it, no need to "upgrade". "Upgrading" is a gear head concept. If you have issues with the quality of the photos or the way the camera handles, get something that works better for you. I'm in the small (tiny, actually) camp that believes the way a given camera handles is more important than the ultimate quality of the lens. Almost all lenses, if they are not defective, can give a satisfactory image. However, a camera you don't like to pick up and take pictures with because of some ergonomic issue won't get used and you won't like it. On the other hand, if you have a camera that's a joy to use, you'll fave fun taking photos and you'll seek out opportunities to use it, even if there are "better" lenses out there somewhere. Somebody said something to the effect that "comparison is the death of enjoyment". Truer words were seldom spoken!
 
I like what Roger, konicaman, Vics & Dirk have said. I bought a pair of Nikon D2H bodies for work (newspaper) when they first hit the streets. Fell in love with the cameras (although I hated giving up my Nikon D1H) and their capabilities. I used them for work through 2008 (recession hit and lost my flow of income in the smalltown newspaper biz) but continued to use them for another five years as I could not justify the costs of a Nikon D3. There just was not enough of an improvement for me to warrant moving to the next new thing. When I retired in 2012, I started thinking about the gear I had - everything from a 300mm f2.8 to a 12-24mm f4 and a few lenses inbetween. I just did not need that much capability anymore (8fps, AF tracking, etc.). I thought about a return to film exclusively but have enjoyed digital so sold all the Nikon gear to move to a couple of Fuji X-System cameras. And, slowly but surely, I am learning those cameras to produce images that are meaningful to me.

And isn't that what it is really all about? Getting an image that I REALLY want to keep, print, and hang on a wall in my home or use in a photobook (books that will be given to my kids to show them what I have seen and done in this life) is what drives me these days. Not all of us can internationally renown photojournalists or the next Man Ray. I was content to be a smalltown news shooter for a small weekly for a decade - watching and documenting ordinary people getting through life as best they could. Now I am content to just find images that continue in that theme. I am inspired by Bryan Moss.
 
Keep on shooting with what you have, till you REALLY feel the camera is limiting your output in a significant way. One of the reasons I like good cameras for, is that I can SEE the subject well - for this reason alone I would stay away from peephole LTM cameras.
 
The path you are considering is one I've gone down, so I'm simply relate my upgrade path. I started in the RF world with a FED-2 and I-26M; I bought it from Fedka, so it was reliable out of the box and remains so. It did everything it needed to, but the lure of speed drew me to a Jupiter-8, and the possibilities of a wider FOV to a Jupiter-12. Around this time I started to explore street photography, and I got the idea that a better VF and faster winding would be useful, so I bought a Canon P. I liked it, but now the ergonomics of the Soviet lenses started to grate, so I grabbed a Canon 50/1.5 and 35/2.8. And I had 100mm lines in the VF, so why not get a longer lens as well? Enter an Elmar 90/4 and a Nikkor 135/3.5 (package deal). All was going well, but a minor issue with the shutter on the P got me thinking that a backup body would be a good idea, so I bought an L1 (hey, let's try out that switchable viewfinder, right?). Somewhere along the line I also acquired a FED 50/3.5, a Voigtländer 21/4, and recently a Canon 50/1.9 as well.

So I went from my simple Soviet kit to a pile of LTM stuff. Do I need it? Nope. Are my photos better? Well, maybe a few of them are - the 50/1.5 and 35/2.8 are really nice lenses, and the other focal lengths are fun to play with (especially the 21) - but most would probably look very similar with the Soviet gear. Sure, the 1:1 VF on the P is easier to work with, and the lever wind is smoother and more convenient, but those are luxuries, not necessities.

In the end, I probably could have stuck with what I had and ended up taking photos that were almost identical to what I produced with all the other gear. Truth be told, I still enjoy shooting with the FED-2 (usually mounting the collapsible 50/3.5 for portability). If I had more self-control I could manage fine with just that and nothing more, but I'm a weak, weak man who likes shiny things.
 
If your happy with the shooting Experience and the final outcome of the shot
Then by All means keep shooting with that setup
Keep Life Simple and Enjoy the Moment ! ;)

As for Me, I have learned alot from the variety of Gear
but I have also gotten side tracked and wasted Time & Money
Back to Simplicity for Moi
 
All a matter of personal taste. If the Zorki works for you, that is all that matters.
For me, I like experimenting with different cameras and different ways of shooting.
I enjoy shooting all sorts of cameras. The Fujifilm Instax 210 is great fun as is the Sigma SD1 and Fuji XT1. Lots of choice out there for all of us to enjoy! I just can't stick with one camera for imaging.
 
It comes down to your finances. If things are tight, you sound happy enough with your zorki. If you have a couple of hundred dollars to spare, I'd suggest you find a Leica CL. (Lots around for that price with inoperative meter.)

The advantage of the CL over your zorki is a much better viewfinder, and access to M-mount as well as compatibility with all ltm lenses. Use the Jupiter on the CL until you've saved enough for a second lens.

That's what I'd do, anyway. Good luck!
 
I received Z4 as rear cap for J-3. Nobody want's it even for $15.

Bessa R leaves all FSU RFs in the dust if you are into 50mm and 35mm lenses to be used in real photography. Same as LTM Color Skopar leaves in the dust J-12.
If you like it chrome and heavy get Canon RF and their glass.

FSU RFs are sentimental value for some like me, collecting interest or cheapest cameras to get to RFs and have fun, IMO.
 
tunalegs said:
It is understood there are many cameras which are better in this or that way - the question is whether they're better enough to be worth paying for.
Click to expand...

That is a purely subjective call, and would be different for almost everyone. A Zorki 4 with a Jupiter 8 is a pretty decent camera, and depending on what you want to do, it's not all that likely that you will find a situation it can't handle. For me, its main limitation is that the quite good viewfinder can't handle other focal lengths, and I really don't much like accessory viewfinders, unless I need something wider than a 35mm lens.
I think you are going about it the right way, in borrowing and trying different cameras to see if you like them enough to pay out some money. You may not know just what features you want, and using the camera is the only way to determine if the overall experience is what you want. Having said that, I can't resist making a recommendation for a Canon P. It's about the same size as your Zorki 4, with a good lever wind and a great viewfinder with framelines for 35, 50, and 100mm lenses. Have a look at the Cameraquest page for the Canon P.

https://cameraquest.com/canonp.htm

They can be had on ebay for $100 or less, if you are a bit patient. Although they are larger than the classic screwmount Leicas, they are far more convenient than the "Barnacks" for actual photography.

The Bessa R is also a good choice, with an excellent meter and a superb finder, but it is made of plastic and feels like it; that probably bothers me more than it should.

Cheers,
Dez
 
Over the years, I have owned most of the major FSU camera types. And a lot of the various lenses.
I absolutely enjoyed trying all of them but I also know that I would not have bought all of them if I could have physically handled all the ones I was interested in.
This also applies to most of the other cameras/lenses I've had.
So, I can only agree with much of the advice above: if you are getting photos you like and are not feeling limited by your Zorki, there is no real need for anything else.
I am still using the first Jupiter-8 I bought; it has given me the vast majority o fphotos that I like. I mostly use it on my Bessa R mainly because I like not having to carry a seperate meter and having the excellent VF makes things a bit easier for me.
Rob
 
I agree with Helen, simplicity is good! Recently I've been going through my negatives from the 1970s for a show in January and the question I've been asking myself is 'Why so many different types of film?' I used just about everything I could get my hands on when I should have just standardised on one or two and really got to know them. The same applies to cameras -- find one you're happy with and stick to it. Of course it's fun to experiment but it's even more fun to master what you're doing.
 
I had fun with a couple of FSU bodies and lenses.
I tried a Canon P, too.

Now I have a Bessa R body with 35/2.5 Skopar lens.
I'm very happy with this combo.

Chris
 
The z4 with a j8 is a valid combo and you can take great pictures with them, a Leica, Nikon or Canon won't make you become a better photographer for sure BUT the main limitation is the impossibility to use any other lenses besides 50 mm without external finder.

If you just want to shoot 50 mm and the camera is smooth and reliable keep it that way, you're not a second class photographerbecause you use a zorki.
 
Bessa R vs Leica CL

Bessa R is limited to ltm lenses.

CL is compatible with both M mount lenses, and ltm lenses via adaptor.

CL is black for sure. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom