Leica M6 versus New Zeiss Ikon

[JeffGreene]

I've finally decided after reading about "Leica Glow" and the "clarity and sharpness" of the new Zeiss system to upgrade to the M system. I'm in a pretty good position as I currently have no investment in M system lenses or bodies. Please don't advise me not to move forward. I will be doing so. I have a GAS infection of many years standing as I am sure you all understand. I promise it will not happen in March! Put yourself in my position. In the best of all possible worlds, all you Leica fans and Zeiss-niks, if you had to start over now, which of the two would you go with and why. I rely on your greater experience and wisdom in these matters. I like wide angle lenses. So if you could recommend a good starter lens for either system you support that would be great! Thanks in advance!

 

[Memnon]

I use an M4 and an M6 TTL. As for lenses I have a 35mm Summicron, a 50mm Summicron and Elmar and a 90mm Summicron.
I was in the opportunity to test the Zeiss 35 and 50 for a period of 2 days which I extensively did. I am not a scientist, I don't go for lines per whatever measure, I dont shoot test charts, I go out and photograph a couple of typical scenes for my shooting habbits.
I did so with the 35 and 50-ties, same exposure, B&W both tri-x and HC110, colour and slides. when they all finally came together I spent half a day looking at them, not only the sharpness but the total quality of the picture at different apperature settings, and came up with the following,

the Zeiss 50 can in no way keep up with the summicron at any setting, it is sharp, but so is my digicam if you know what I mean. The 50 summicron is clearly the better lens for me and my sort of shooting.
With the 35 however it's the other way around, the Zeiss at F2 is not as good as the summicron at F2 but getting to f4 and higher the zeiss is fantastic, in B&W colour and slide, better enough for me to decide to purchase a CZ 35mm.

I know this is not much to go by, but it's just my view. In my opinion you can purchase an Elmar 2.8 50mm (new version) which can be gotten pretty cheap, cheaper than the CZ and get the CZ 35mm which is a great lens, with terrific luminousity....

 

[FPjohn]

Leica

Leica

I've finally decided after reading about "Leica Glow" and the "clarity and sharpness" of the new Zeiss system to upgrade to the M system. I'm in a pretty good position as I currently have no investment in M system lenses or bodies. Please don't advise me not to move forward. I will be doing so. I have a GAS infection of many years standing as I am sure you all understand. I promise it will not happen in March! Put yourself in my position. In the best of all possible worlds, all you Leica fans and Zeiss-niks, if you had to start over now, which of the two would you go with and why. I rely on your greater experience and wisdom in these matters. I like wide angle lenses. So if you could recommend a good starter lens for either system you support that would be great! Thanks in advance!

Hello:

If you want a Leica you want a Leica. The ZI appears to be a fully modern M mount camera which will take classic Zeiss design lenses. So will a M series Leica or a CV Voigtlander.

I can recommend a used M, M4p and above, with a used Summicron or new Elmar as the place to begin. However, by all means handle the ZI or the R2s and kin as well before making your choice.

I have no claims to wisdom-just an opinion.

best of light to you
Frank

 

[rover]

There are a couple similar threads going on right now.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=250972#post250972

Well one at least.

I think your question can be answered by your deciding how automated of a camera you want.

 

[back alley]

i can't imagine anyone not being happy with either camera or lens sets.

 

[FrankS]

Both systems are better than any of us are as photographers. It is a highly personal choice based on intangibles.

 

[Donald Mann]

Touche

Touche

Both systems are better than any of us are as photographers. It is a highly personal choice based on intangibles.

Good Point Frank!

 

[awilder]

I've used Leica M's for 20 yrs., Nikon for over 30 yrs. and a brief try at the Contax G1 ( slightly better optics than Leica but lousy RF focus accuracy by comparison). If money was no object, the M7 is the better choice in terms of overall excecution and can also do TTL flash. The exposure/ shutter speed LED setup is far better and probably the most cleverly designed arrangement in any camera I've ever used. I also like the ability for the user to tweak RF alignment if it ever goes out of adjustment, something you can't do on the ZI. The ZI does have a higher shutter and flash sync speed as well as improved viewfinder optics in some respects. This and reduced price and weight (?) are it's chief benefits. Some have griped about it's mechanical feel and don't like the bottom rewind feature. Optically you can pretty much mix ZI or Leica lenses with either body, I'm only talking about the bodies. Regarding wide angle lenses, you probably know which focal length is best for your needs as both companies make exceptional optics in all wide angles. If you like a 28, the ZI body allows better viewing of the frame lines than the .72 mag M cameras. If you want wider, the viewfinder choice doesn't matter since you'll need an accessory finder.

 

[arthury]

In terms of automation, the ZI seems more like an M7 rather than M6.

 

[Huck Finn]

Jeff, I assume that the comparable prices of the M6 & ZI are what is leading you to choose between these two. So, on one level it's an easy choice - a mechanical, all-manual camera vs an electronic, auto-exposure camera. Which do you prefer? However, since you asked the question, I assume that you are loooking beyond that.

I agree with those who say try them out. It's like buying a car. You wouldn't buy without a test drive. It's great that you have a choice. A point-by-point comparison to determine which is the better camera is really irrelevant since both can get basic job done equally well. Sometimes it's just one feature that makes the difference. For me, the viewfinder of the ZI made all the difference, so I went in that direction. It may not have been so important for someone else. Just like the car purchase. If you need the headroom, you're probably not buying a mini-Cooper, but that may be the only car for someone else.

If you post some questions, it may be easier to offer a specific response. There are many reviews of the Leica M6 available on line. Less for the ZI, so check out Mike Elek's website at http://elekm.net/zeiss_ikon.

As others have said with regard to the lenses, you can use either lens line with either camera. Some have said that the Zeiss results have a look are more like medium format results, while Leica lenses are a little sharper. Others have recommended Zeiss for color, Leica for B&W. To draw such fine distinctions is probably nit picking unless you know what you're looking for. Again, a specific question might make it easier to respond. They're all great lenses, so pick a 35 or 50 from either & you'll be happy with the results.

Best of luck,
Huck