Riverman
Well-known
Cheer up. I'm sure there'll be film around in ten years. If there isn't it won't be for lack of demand. Also - without for a minute disputing the quality of craftsmanship or durability of an M3 or an M2 I suspect one possible reason comparatively fewer cameras of other marques of similar vintage are seen these days is that comparatively fewer were built. I don't know this for certain but I wonder.
Anyway. Today I got the opportunity to look at an M8 in a store - I'm not in the market for one (currently debating between an M7 and a Zeiss Ikon) - but I wanted to check out the viewfinder on a Leica (never held any M mount camera before) I have to say I didn't get on well with the viewfinder in the M8. I think I've been really spoiled by the Mamiya 6. The widest framelines visible in this M8 were a real strain to see - can't be dealing with that, particularly as I like wider lenses. I'm assuming the same would be true of the M7.
This means, that if I go the M7 route I probably have to go for an a la carte 0.58. Ouch. At the moment - and with all I've heard about its superb viewfinder - the Zeiss Ikon edges ahead for me. With the (considerable) loot spared not buying a la carte I could pick up a chrome M4 to satisfy the Leica craving and just shoot very forgiving HP5 on it (judging the exposure myself) and use the metered Zeiss for my slides work.
mojobebop
Well-known
photo village
mfogiel
Veteran
@Riverman
I use a 0.85x M7, ZI, (0.74x) and a 0.58 M7. Viewfinder wise, the 0.58x M7 looks like a smaller and dimmer version of the ZI, with just a touch more room around the 28mm frames. I sort of use one body for one FL, so 0.58 for the 28mm ZI for the 35mm and 0.85 for the 50mm (I got the 75mm frames removed from that one as it was an utter mess). If you want the 28 and 50 mm lenses, the 0,58x M7 will have you covered, but the 50mm frame is somewhat small and messed up by the 75mm one. Another point is, that this VF demands the use of compact lenses whenever possible, else they tend to block the VF somehow. For this reason I have not bought the 28 Summicron, which has an oversized hood, but am using the Biogon 28, Ultron 2.0 or Elmarit 2.8 ASPH. The last one would be ideal, as it is the smallest of all, but if the speed and size are not the object, I prefer the Biogon for its rendering. Among the Zeiss 50mm lenses, the Planar is the most universal and sharp, but I actually shoot more frequently with the C Sonnars for people photos, or with the DR Summicron 50/2 for the street. What I would suggest to you, is to get the ZI and the Ultron 28 or Biogon 28 for the practicity, and get a nice condition M3 or 0.85x M6 with a Rigid or DR Summicron for the Leica feel, good VF for longer lenses and for the silent shutter which comes handy when shooting people in public places.
28 Biogon
Planar 50
C Sonnar 50
DR Summicron 50
I use a 0.85x M7, ZI, (0.74x) and a 0.58 M7. Viewfinder wise, the 0.58x M7 looks like a smaller and dimmer version of the ZI, with just a touch more room around the 28mm frames. I sort of use one body for one FL, so 0.58 for the 28mm ZI for the 35mm and 0.85 for the 50mm (I got the 75mm frames removed from that one as it was an utter mess). If you want the 28 and 50 mm lenses, the 0,58x M7 will have you covered, but the 50mm frame is somewhat small and messed up by the 75mm one. Another point is, that this VF demands the use of compact lenses whenever possible, else they tend to block the VF somehow. For this reason I have not bought the 28 Summicron, which has an oversized hood, but am using the Biogon 28, Ultron 2.0 or Elmarit 2.8 ASPH. The last one would be ideal, as it is the smallest of all, but if the speed and size are not the object, I prefer the Biogon for its rendering. Among the Zeiss 50mm lenses, the Planar is the most universal and sharp, but I actually shoot more frequently with the C Sonnars for people photos, or with the DR Summicron 50/2 for the street. What I would suggest to you, is to get the ZI and the Ultron 28 or Biogon 28 for the practicity, and get a nice condition M3 or 0.85x M6 with a Rigid or DR Summicron for the Leica feel, good VF for longer lenses and for the silent shutter which comes handy when shooting people in public places.
28 Biogon
Planar 50
C Sonnar 50
DR Summicron 50
Last edited:
notturtle
Well-known
Riverman, 0.58 M7s are not that uncommon on the used marked. I thin you would be nuts to get a new one a la carte when you could get a mint used one for $2500.
presspass
filmshooter
If you wear glasses and want to see the shutter speed, the M7 is the only choice. I did have trouble with the older DX reader in an M7, but constant use cleared that up. The ZI has a brighter viewfinder, but I can't see the shutter speeds and miss the Rapidwinder.
Riverman
Well-known
Today I managed to handle a few M6s in a store - including an 0.58. I have to say I'm not blown away by the Leica viewfinders - maybe it just takes some getting used to. I've been so spoiled by the Mamiya 6 viewfinder - the Leica finders are really small and uncomfortable by comparison. Worn black chrome M6s are fairly unattractive I've concluded too. I played with a chrome M4 which was much prettier. Have to find a store in London stocking the Ikon to size it up. RFF is a valuable resource but there's no substitute to actually getting hold of a camera and trying it out.
Riverman
Well-known
Great shots! Your suggestion seems very sensible. After failing to be dazzled by the M6 0.58 finder the Ikon seems a real contender - just have to see one "in the flesh". I played with an M4 today and really liked it. Going for the Ikon I could easily pick up an M3 or M4 at the same time, with the money saved over a new M7.
astroman
-
I owned a M6 last year for a while very nice camera but the veiwfinder isnt great
I found bessa veiwfinders much better than the M6 ones
I found bessa veiwfinders much better than the M6 ones
Last edited:
dovi
Well-known
go used zi from a reputable place. save a stack and take a class.
notturtle
Well-known
It all depends on usage. If always using it in a city or close to support, the ZI makes a lot of sense. However, if using it far from home for protracted periods and in rough environments, most would probably expect the Leica M to be somewhat more reliable and resilient. anecdotal evidence is hard to stack up, but it would appear that although Leica Ms have problems out of the box too, the ZI has had somewhat more. There are stories of shutter problems etc with leica MPs for example (it seems many are due to shards of film getting caught in the shutter), but they are relatively rare. RF misalignment ouf the box with a M is not something I have heard mentioned but seems not uncommon with the ZI.
I have never even held a ZI, but they sound great - esp the finder - but where absolute reliability is concerned a well proven mechanical Leica is perhaps the better option and I don't mean the M7, but a M6/P. Unless you work under thse conditions the whole reliability/solidity thing becomes far less of an issue I suppose. I would ignore it on the basis that once a body has done 6-12 months and the warranty is up, if it is going to have some of the usual gremlins they would likely have already arisen. From then on, you probably have a reliable body.
I have been considering selling my MPs to save money for projects and I am assuming that some of the creases have been ironed out of the ZI now that it has been on the market a while, but who knows? It seems there was a point when a few unlucky people have to go through 3-4 ZIs to get one aligned out of the box, which suggests a faulty batch. I am reading of fewer probs lately, but this could be my imagination!
I have never even held a ZI, but they sound great - esp the finder - but where absolute reliability is concerned a well proven mechanical Leica is perhaps the better option and I don't mean the M7, but a M6/P. Unless you work under thse conditions the whole reliability/solidity thing becomes far less of an issue I suppose. I would ignore it on the basis that once a body has done 6-12 months and the warranty is up, if it is going to have some of the usual gremlins they would likely have already arisen. From then on, you probably have a reliable body.
I have been considering selling my MPs to save money for projects and I am assuming that some of the creases have been ironed out of the ZI now that it has been on the market a while, but who knows? It seems there was a point when a few unlucky people have to go through 3-4 ZIs to get one aligned out of the box, which suggests a faulty batch. I am reading of fewer probs lately, but this could be my imagination!
George S.
How many is enough?
If you "never even held a ZI" then how can you make broad statements about reliability/ solidity? [Your words]
True, there's probably nothing that feels more solid than a M Leica, since it's all metal and no hinged back, but just who are you quoting with regard to reliability? Don't believe everything you read on the internet. It allows people all over the world to hear a single someone complain about a problem 10,000 miles away. You can always find someone who's had a problem with every model of camera made in the past 100 years. A few anecdotal stories on the 'net mean little or nothing in the overall picture.
True, there's probably nothing that feels more solid than a M Leica, since it's all metal and no hinged back, but just who are you quoting with regard to reliability? Don't believe everything you read on the internet. It allows people all over the world to hear a single someone complain about a problem 10,000 miles away. You can always find someone who's had a problem with every model of camera made in the past 100 years. A few anecdotal stories on the 'net mean little or nothing in the overall picture.
Aziz
Established
I'm not buying into the M7 being more reliable. Yes, it's heavier and contains more metal. But after 4.5 months, the top plate on my M7 has come loose and the film advance begins to tighten half way through a roll. And I've babied this camera.
On the other hand, I've dropped my Bessa R4A a number of times (blame alcohol) and haven't had a real problem with it yet.
On the other hand, I've dropped my Bessa R4A a number of times (blame alcohol) and haven't had a real problem with it yet.
calajava@gmail.com
calajava
I never understand the ground of this kind of comparison, Leica vs Others...
a M7 is cost almost 3 times to a ZI and even more for Bessa, that is never a apple-to-apple comparison. just doesn't make sense at all. Even comparing Leica's 2nd hand camera...
Personally, I own a ZI and a Bessa R3M, both are excellence camera and work flawlessly.
a M7 is cost almost 3 times to a ZI and even more for Bessa, that is never a apple-to-apple comparison. just doesn't make sense at all. Even comparing Leica's 2nd hand camera...
Personally, I own a ZI and a Bessa R3M, both are excellence camera and work flawlessly.
martin s
Well-known
I've seen virtually mint m7's on ebay.de which cost about the same as a new Ikon, so I think they are comparable.
martin
martin
George S.
How many is enough?
Mint M7s run $1800- $2400 depending if it has had the upgrades or not. A mint ZI runs about $1000- 1100. New ZIs are $1350- $1500. I wouldn't call a thousand dollar difference 'about the same'.
P. Lynn Miller
Well-known
I own neither, but have spent equal time with both...
The ZI is a great camera, but the noise level of the shutter and film transport of the Ikon is simply unacceptable to me for my line of work and M7 is the only choice.
If I was only ever going to shoot landscapes and etc, the ZI would be the better camera, but when I am shooting from the front row of an opera or assigned to photograph a funeral, firing the shutter of the ZI sounds like dropping a bucket of rocks into a steel wheelbarrow. Not to mention, the noise of winding the film to the next frame.
The quietness of the Leica M is the only reason that I own a Leica, between the Bessa R-series and the ZI, those cameras can do everything and more that a Leica M can do except be silent. But do not mention the M8, like bringing a Mack truck to a funeral, one of the biggest disappoints of my photography career.
So the Leica M7 it is... for me.
The ZI is a great camera, but the noise level of the shutter and film transport of the Ikon is simply unacceptable to me for my line of work and M7 is the only choice.
If I was only ever going to shoot landscapes and etc, the ZI would be the better camera, but when I am shooting from the front row of an opera or assigned to photograph a funeral, firing the shutter of the ZI sounds like dropping a bucket of rocks into a steel wheelbarrow. Not to mention, the noise of winding the film to the next frame.
The quietness of the Leica M is the only reason that I own a Leica, between the Bessa R-series and the ZI, those cameras can do everything and more that a Leica M can do except be silent. But do not mention the M8, like bringing a Mack truck to a funeral, one of the biggest disappoints of my photography career.
So the Leica M7 it is... for me.
notturtle
Well-known
Because the ownership of one single camera would hardly constitute a broad statement. Owning one ZI would tell me nothing other than my personal experience with one camera, which is unlikely to be useful data. I am quoting numerous users on this and other forums, who did report a very substantial number of faults with their ZIs. This may have been due to early batch teething problems, or simply because a lot were bought in a short space of time and only those who had faults responded to the threads, but the fact is, quite a few people reported problems that resulted in the cameras being returned (over many threads and forums). Even little things, like the strap lugs wearing dangerously thin in a short time (for those that keep the camera on a strap the whole time). Again, maybe they changed the materials used and thing have improved, but the impression I got, was that QC had some issues, with the following faults appearing a good number of times:
Shutters failing almost immediately
RF out of alignment out of the box
Popping frame lines
Strap lugs wearing out super fast.
Maybe these issue are a thing of the past, but you cannot dismiss the internet entirely. It does allow a lot of people to come together, but thats kinda the point. Of course all cameras have had issues, but there was a distinct splurge in relation to the ZI followed by a lull, which may mean those with issues were repaired and the new ones being produced have the kinks ironed out.
George S.
How many is enough?
Don't forget that people who have had a problem are much more likely to post a reply in a thread topic such as "Reliability" than people who have had zero issues. It's like that with everything. And the internet brings so many people together from around the world that bought the same item- whether it be a Zeiss Ikon or Jaguar auto, or Sony TV- that what you can now see are reports of problems from around the world, and if you place too much weight on these reports, you'd probably buy NOTHING, for there's always going to be reported problems with everything if you have access to enough buyers.
Like you said, all cameras throughout the past 150 years have had issues, you just never heard of them and went out and bought a Kodak Brownie because you liked other Kodak products and everyone you saw had a Brownie. Then again, how much COULD go wrong with cameras from that era? They weren't all that complicated.
Like you said, all cameras throughout the past 150 years have had issues, you just never heard of them and went out and bought a Kodak Brownie because you liked other Kodak products and everyone you saw had a Brownie. Then again, how much COULD go wrong with cameras from that era? They weren't all that complicated.
wintoid
Back to film
I have owned the ZI and now own the M7. The M7 would be my choice, largely because my technique wasn't up to consistently positioning my eye correctly for the ZI patch.
Criticisms of the ZI:
1) First one had to go back for replacement as framelines got stuck and would "ping" into place
2) Viewfinder patch hard to see (for me)
Criticisms of the M7
1) I can't believe this thing takes so long from power-on to be ready to shoot. It's not a digital, for **** sake
2) Exposure compensation is in the wrong place, end of story
Criticisms of the ZI:
1) First one had to go back for replacement as framelines got stuck and would "ping" into place
2) Viewfinder patch hard to see (for me)
Criticisms of the M7
1) I can't believe this thing takes so long from power-on to be ready to shoot. It's not a digital, for **** sake
2) Exposure compensation is in the wrong place, end of story
martin s
Well-known
In Germany it's 1500 Euros new (pretty much no used ones available) and plenty of used M7's for 1500-2000 Euros, even 1300.
martin