Look what came in the mail! Now it's time for tough decisions!

[Jerevan]

Which camera makes you happy just picking it up, just making you want to get out making photographs?

 

[Godfrey]

I've had Leicas (Barnacks first, then Ms) since 1969.

No matter how many other RF cameras I use, and no matter how good they are, I find I always end up selling them off and going back to Leica. The Contax G2 was wonderful, the lenses terrific ... but I just liked shooting with the Leica more. The ZI that I borrowed was also terrific, but I like the M4-2 more.

The only non-M RF camera that's had any staying power for me is also a Leica, the CL. I've on the third one of those I've owned now. ;-)

Good luck with your decision.

G

 

[froyd]

Im surprised to hear you say that.

the ZM lens is significantly improved wide open and suppressed basically all of the remaining field curvature in the double gauss design. as a result, stopped down sharpness of the ZM50p is definitely more even across the frame for planar subjects.

unfortunately this can also make the lens render in a boring way.

if your preference, and since this is on film I feel it's a safe assumption but feel free to correct me, is that you feel the g45 images are more aesthetically appealing rather than there being a significant difference in sharpness in the plane of best focus. if it is really the latter, then I would very much like to know what film/developer combination you are using and what you are using to scan/enlarge your negatives. if it's the former, which to be frank is what I suspect, then what you are seeing is actually an imperfection that happens to be pleasing in use.

Maybe, but the film and processing are the same. I photographed the same subject with the same exposure and what I see as the winning attribute of the G45 is not sharpness or lack of distortion. I shot the test images handheld, to mimic my typical actual use. What really stands out, is the color pop that the G lens gives. The ZM seems cooler. In golden light settings, the G has an extra something, almost has if it had a very very mild warming filter on it. I really like the effect!

 

[Peter_S]

My 2 cents after owing G2, ZI, M7 and now M6, and both Planars:
- keep the G2 and 45mm. Nothing like it in 35mm format. Sharp and smooth at the same time (and so good with Portra, though I normally only shoot b/w film)
- keep the ZI or M4, but switch the Planar for a ZM Sonnar that is optimized for f/1.5 on film; The ZM Planar does not give you anything more than the G2 Planar.

This way you avoid redundancy between bodies and lenses.

Whether ZI or M4 - well, that depends. I had an ZI, but switched to an M6 (with MP-finder though) - the ZI was not robust enough for what I use cameras for; else - a terrific camera.

But keep that G2+45mm. I sold mine and only since I shoot MF that does not bother me anymore.

 

[Balto]

You know, I thought I would be more impressed by the ZI viewfinder. After all, I remember with fondness the finder in the Bessa, and the ZI is supposed to be better. However, in practical use, I never felt it put to shame the finder of the M4 (which was recently CLA'd). If anything, the magically disappearing RF patch of the ZI tilts the scale in favor of the rock-solid VF/RF of the Leica.

This is of course based on using a 50 lens. I'm sure that with a 35, the wider space around the ZI framelines woulc come handy, and it's one of the many reasons I'm hesitating.

Oh there is no doubting the quality of the leica VF, my M6 does the job well for me, though shooting exclusively 35mm I would enjoy a bit more space as you stated. At the end of the day, I think leica's have proven their staying power better then any other system. The ZI is still relatively new compared to most M's on the market, so who knows how they will age in the long run really.

 

[Eric T]

I made my choice. I just sold my Zeiss ZI SW and have kept my Leica M1 and IIIf.

 

[white.elephant]

Which camera makes you happy just picking it up, just making you want to get out making photographs?

This statement has such wisdom and insight behind it. Bravo.

 

[froyd]

It took nearly 4 months, but I finally came to the conclusion that the Ikon had to go and the M4 stayed. I will post a post-mortem review of the Ikon in the Zeiss forum because I learned a lot about that camera in the 4 month of ownership and those insights might be useful to those interested in the Ikon.

In the end, the built-in meter did not make camera operation as fast as I had though, and it required too much babysitting to be trusted blindly. Also, I expected the viewfinder to be more impressive but the cons balanced the pros to the extent that I found the M4's VF and RF patch preferable. But ultimately, what helped me make up my mind is the fact that the M4 puts me in a better frame of mind to take pictures.

I was really looking forward to better outdoor flash photography, so the ZI will be missed for its higher sync speed, but if I am honest with myself, I use flash outdoors (and even indoors) quite rarely, and I I have a Contax G for that task.

Thanks to all who offered advice. I will focus now on collecting great lenses that I can take digital, if I ever chose to. Unfortunately, I sold my goggled Summaron thinking I would sell the M4 and keep the ZI... now I'm off to buy a new one. Best BW lens I ever used.

 

[Godfrey]

Oh there is no doubting the quality of the leica VF, my M6 does the job well for me, though shooting exclusively 35mm I would enjoy a bit more space as you stated. At the end of the day, I think leica's have proven their staying power better then any other system. The ZI is still relatively new compared to most M's on the market, so who knows how they will age in the long run really.

Possibly going a little off track here. Pardon the digression...

Just had the M4-2 out recently. And was surprised and delighted at the viewfinder yet again, compared to the M9. The M9's lower magnification and busier frame lines annoys me some times.

I mean, I can't see the 28mm frame lines anyway (I just use the whole viewfinder that I can see for the 28), I don't have a 75 at present (and have a Voigtländer 75mm OVF if I needed one), and the .72x magnification is so much nicer for my eyes for focusing a 50mm lens.

Hmm. Time for an email to DAG: I wonder if he could swap in a .72x finder with M4 frame lines, and what it would cost... ?

G

 

[froyd]

Both the ZI and the M4 have great frameline combos. Much as I've tried to like M6s, I always stumble on the combined 50/75 framelines, what an awful pairing! I would probably get used to it, in time, or have a repairman remove the 75s, but fortunately I don't need to.