M7 or a Zeiss Ikon ZM?

M7 or a Zeiss Ikon ZM?

  • ZM

    Votes: 459 45.5%

  • M7

    Votes: 550 54.5%
  • Total voters
    1,009
kshapero said:
Off topic, I also have a Nikon FM3a. Best of both worlds, aperture preferred but all speeds work if battery dies. But that mirror slap!! Anyway I got the CV 40mm/f2 pancake, a real joy.
Click to expand...

hi,

the fm3a is similar to the fm2, correct?
it does have computer circuitry as well.

is the shutter mechanism all mechanical?
 
mojobebop said:
hi,

the fm3a is similar to the fm2, correct?
it does have computer circuitry as well.

is the shutter mechanism all mechanical?
Click to expand...

Both the FM2 and FM3A have all mechanical shutter speeds from B to maximum speed, with or without battery.

In the FM2, no battery only means no meter (diode).

In the FM3A, no battery only means no meter (match needle) and no AE.

I have the F, F2, FM2/T and FM3A. If I had to pick one for prolonged travels, the FM3A will be my choice.

The FM2 and FM3A both use 2 ea. LR44 or SR44 battery, available anywhere...also used in my ZM.:)

Also, the eyepieces (rubber rings, diopter correction...) of the FM/FM3A are interchangeable with the ZM, including the DG1 or DG2 2X eyepieces magnifier.
 
Frankie said:
Both the FM2 and FM3A have all mechanical shutter speeds from B to maximum speed, with or without battery.

In the FM2, no battery only means no meter (diode).

In the FM3A, no battery only means no meter (match needle) and no AE.

I have the F, F2, FM2/T and FM3A. If I had to pick one for prolonged travels, the FM3A will be my choice.

The FM2 and FM3A both use 2 ea. LR44 or SR44 battery, available anywhere...also used in my ZM.:)

Also, the eyepieces (rubber rings, diopter correction...) of the FM/FM3A are interchangeable with the ZM, including the DG1 or DG2 2X eyepieces magnifier.
Click to expand...
Nicely put.
 
I find the "battery issue" to be an easily solved problem by spending $4 and carrying something the weight of a quarter in my pocket. Every camera I own has an electronic shutter, i.e. dead battery is a dead camera or just one shutter speed. But this does not make my list of top one thousand problems I face because it has a guaranteed cheap easy solution.

Frankie said:
Both the FM2 and FM3A have all mechanical shutter speeds from B to maximum speed, with or without battery.

In the FM2, no battery only means no meter (diode).

In the FM3A, no battery only means no meter (match needle) and no AE.

I have the F, F2, FM2/T and FM3A. If I had to pick one for prolonged travels, the FM3A will be my choice.

The FM2 and FM3A both use 2 ea. LR44 or SR44 battery, available anywhere...also used in my ZM.:)

Also, the eyepieces (rubber rings, diopter correction...) of the FM/FM3A are interchangeable with the ZM, including the DG1 or DG2 2X eyepieces magnifier.
Click to expand...
 
I have ordered an M7 last Friday and are waiting for it to arrive, keen to shoot some color-slide film with the camera... :D Meanwhile, the M4-P and CL will do the job. :)
 
Wow
glad to see I'm the one who's moving the whole castle toward the Zeiss Ikon (117 vs 116: what a match!)
To me is a practical thing, I think Ikon is more flexible for less price; M7 is more for collectors and has some little disadvantages.
 
I think Ikon is too expensive for what it is. Voigt Bessa R2a R3a R4a and ZI share the same shutter same transport mechanism while M7 uses silent cloth shutter (producing virtually no sound compared to m6) with M mechanism and 60-125 without battery operation. I prefer Bessa for cost effective option and M7 for performance. but M7 is not something I consider buying second hand.
 
Last edited:
Hi folks. My first post here. I've been umming and ahhing between an M7 or the Zeiss for a few weeks now and have found lots of useful information on the forums here. I used to shoot lots of 35mm on a Minolta SLR, then moved to a Mamiya 6, which has been my main camera for the last few years. My old Minolta (X700) really was a great camera - it was an inexpensive gateway to film photography and I hauled that camera and two MD lenses all over the place. Recently I've been shooting 35mm again on a Contax autofocus point and shoot job and have decided it's time for a 35mm M mount system having enjoyed the rangefinder experience on the Mamiya.

I want aperture priority automation and I want to buy new so I'm faced with the choice between the Zeiss and the M7. My head says go for the Ikon but my heart prefers the M7 - hell I've been taking photos over ten years and can finally afford one - so why not right? My reasons for preferring the M7 body are utterly vain to be honest - I just prefer the form compared to the Ikon. It looks nicer and irrational as it is, I'll pay a premium for that.

Lens wise however, I'm far more concerned with bang for buck than beauty. And on that score the ZM lenses seem to offer a helluva lot more bang for buck than their Leica counterparts. The ZM 50mm and 28mm would fit my shooting needs nicely. Is anyone out there using any of the Zeiss ZM lenses on recent M bodies? What's your experience with them?
 
Photon42 said:
On important questions, always follow your heart :cool:

Cheers
Ivo
Click to expand...

Let's see- Girl #2 has all the necessary parts, cost a little less, is a proven performer- A guy that thinks with his head would make a wise decision to choose her. Girl #1 is a beautiful exotic work of art that was born of legendary heritage as well as performing to the utmost on a near spiritual level, a man dreams about her at night and loves her in his heart before he has ever held her in his hands. If you can hve one why would you consider the other?

P.S. Girl #2 has fat ankles.
 
Just went thru this debate, and decided on the (more expensive) M7 for two reasons: moving rf patch, and 75mm frame lines (I use 35mm and 75mm primarily). YMMV
 
quietmouse said:
Let's see- Girl #2 has all the necessary parts, cost a little less, is a proven performer- A guy that thinks with his head would make a wise decision to choose her. Girl #1 is a beautiful exotic work of art that was born of legendary heritage as well as performing to the utmost on a near spiritual level, a man dreams about her at night and loves her in his heart before he has ever held her in his hands. If you can hve one why would you consider the other?

P.S. Girl #2 has fat ankles.
Click to expand...

Nicely put. Any thoughts on the Zeiss lenses though? They seem excellent value to me.
 
maddoc said:
Why wouldn't you buy a M7 second hand ? Just curious.
Click to expand...

Sense of ownership and GAS :D

ZM 35mm f/2 is much superior to leicas current summicron 35 f/2 ASPH, ZM 35 2 is totally distortion free + very good resolving power, i borrowed it from a friend and tested it on adox 25, ive never seen anything like it before. the only lens i found superior to ZM 35 f/2 is Summicron 35 f/2 Chrome limited edition (7 Element Solms)
 
Last edited:
Regarding lenses, I have never shot with the Zeiss. I have read what you have and If I were to purchase new lenses I would purchase Zeiss. I am kind of a touchy feely romantic and I shoot with a bunch of old cheap (relatively) Leica lenses. I can't really afford new Zeiss or Leica glass but if I could I would buy the Zeiss. Those new Leica lenses cost too much.
 
if you had the mamiya rf before and liked it then i think the zm is a better choice for you.
having to remove the baseplate on the m7 to change film is unlike the mamiya and a giant pita, despite what others may say...it's not worth the hassle for outdated gear.
 
back alley said:
if you had the mamiya rf before and liked it then i think the zm is a better choice for you.
having to remove the baseplate on the m7 to change film is unlike the mamiya and a giant pita, despite what others may say...it's not worth the hassle for outdated gear.
Click to expand...

Hmm. The film change thing could be an issue. Today I was out and about at Greenwich shooting photos of HMS Illustrious with my Contax TVS (weird to see an aircraft carrier on the Thames!) - my roll of HP5 ended just as four helicopters on deck lifted off. I had to change the roll QUICK. An M7 could have been a veritable PITA in that situation.

Anyhow - since I've never handled an M7 or the Zeiss, I've decided to check out both in a store. I hope to be in the US later this year and will probably buy there. Where is good in NY for new Leica but also stocking the Zeiss?
 
Leica is built way better than anything else. Why do you see so many 50 year old M3 and M2 around ? See and old Zeiss around in significant numbers?

Now the cost is less so you can figure you will just replace it and that is one philosophy.

Just don`t think it is a cheap Leica, it is not. Maybe film will be totally gone in 10 years and the lifetime investment is gone anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom