Purchase difficulty / M6 vs Ikon

Eddie90723

Eddie90723

Established
Local time
4:10 AM
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
71
An old chestnut of a question if ever there was.
So after a long time of holding out ( not having the cash ) I decided that I'm gonna break down and get a 35mm rf. Well if only life was that easy right? I'm trying to decide between the M6 and the ZI. I thought about the R3A for a bit but I am more drawn to the other two. I mean I have the Voight BIII and I love it to death, but everyone in a while something more compact would be nice. I been reading posts on here, on other websites, reviews, images on flickr, researching various lenses. I know what lens I want (voight 35f/1.4) it's the body to attach it to that's driving me nuts. :bang: So, in this glorious day of technology and such...A&E versus not. I'm fairly simple in what I want: work, take pics, have a built in light meter. I'm going on road trip in August covering Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit, Sandusky. Please help sway my opinion.
 
If you like street shooting, get an AE body, if you like a 35mm lens, get the Zeis Ikon - it has the bst 35mm frame ever made in the RF world. If you are after landscapes, etc, then an M6 will do ok. If you like the street and want a Leica, save up and get a 0.58x M7.
 
If you can get along without AE then probably the M6 is a good choice. I never liked the full manual thing. Now I am happy with a Zeiss
 
Both are good choices. I have 2 m6's (0.85 and 0.72) and I tried a ZI in a shop. I just did not like how it felt in my hands. I never use AE, so on that aspect cannot tell you anything. If possible try to handle them both, one of the bodies will speak to you I am sure.

To make things even more complicated for you. Are you really sure about the 35 1.4 with its -in my eyes - harsh bokeh ? I like the VC 1.2 and 1.7 a lot more.

Started out with a R3a in combi with a M Rokkor 40, loved it, but not in the same league as the M6/ZI.
 
I have owned both (currently the Ikon) and honestly there is not much difference apart from AE. The M6 shutter is slightly more quiet, but for me the Ikon fits my hand better and also comes with a warranty. I am happy with the Ikon, and if you go that direction I highly recommend Popflash.
 
Warranties are nice. I like those. I have played with the Ikon at Freestyle in Hollywood using a Zeiss lens. So smooth and the viewfinder was good. I just can't decide. I know I want my money going on great glass versus body.
 
"I'm going on road trip in August covering Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit, Sandusky. Please help sway my opinion." Per Eddie

If you plan to use this camera on your road trip, might be a good idea to get familiar w/it before you leave
and shoot a few rolls.
Nelson
 
Last edited:
Sounds like you're used to shooting with AE. I've always preferred to use Aperture Priority modes on cameras. Which is why i was never interested in a Leica until the M7 came out. I had M7s on two occasions, but sold them. I later tried a Zeiss Icon, which i preferred because of the viewfinder. The Leica is built better, but the Zeiss is easier to use. Get the ZI for two reasons: better VF and because it won't force you to change the way you want to work. The viewfinder issue is minimal, but the less a camera imposes on you the better.
 
It really boils down to AE and finding a good camera before you leave.

If you like AE, a new ZI might be the better choice. I personally prefer the M6, but it might be risky trying to find a good one before you leave.

You can always trade later without loosing a lot of money.

Roland.
 
Since you mention that you have the Bessa III (the MF folder from Fuji I suppose ?) you might be spoiled by the quality of the 6x6 or 6x7 frames.... I just mention because buying a M6 or ZI with a high quality lens (I think that I would prefer the 35/2.8 C-Biogon over the CV 35/1.4) will cost you some big $$$$ but quality will not come close to MF ... (But I can understand the "urge" to buy a new camera and especially a Leica ... :D)
 
Can't go wrong with either choice (i have both). You know the pros and cons already. So, follow your heart or go with your head ... whatever cliche or little thing tips the scale for you (flip a coin? which do you think looks better?), is fine. Just don't second-guess yourself either way -- enjoy the camera and use it to make lots of photos. :)
 
Well said

Well said

mfogiel said:
. . . if you like a 35mm lens, get the Zeis Ikon - it has the bst 35mm frame ever made in the RF world. . . . If you like the street and want a Leica, save up and get a 0.58x M7.
Click to expand...

Excellent advice. I wholly agree with this one.
 
maddoc said:
Since you mention that you have the Bessa III (the MF folder from Fuji I suppose ?) you might be spoiled by the quality of the 6x6 or 6x7 frames.... I just mention because buying a M6 or ZI with a high quality lens (I think that I would prefer the 35/2.8 C-Biogon over the CV 35/1.4) will cost you some big $$$$ but quality will not come close to MF ... (But I can understand the "urge" to buy a new camera and especially a Leica ... :D)
Click to expand...

Gabor, I *think* the OP just wants the compact size of a 35mm RF kit.

OP, if you agree that RFs are essentially differentiated by their VFs, then I would recommend the RF with the best VF for your 35/1,4. Most would agree that this side of a MP 0,58x VF that the ZI or the M2 has the best VF for a 35mm FL lens. Since the M2 is all manual I will discard it as possibility for you, even though I think it is the greatest all-round 35mm camera that I have used;)

If AE is important, get the ZI. I bought a ZI for my wife just after Christmas and she loves to burn slide film in it:) The 35 framelines in the ZI are superb, too.

If AE is not crucial, I'd still consider the ZI just because the vf is sooo good, especially against a m6 vf not mp-upgraded. That said, if you can snatch a mp-upgraded M6, i'd get it over the ZI -- again here assuming AE is negligible to you. If an internal meter was NOT crucial to you, please, take my advice and do yourself a favour --- get a M2. You'd save a bit of money, too.

So those are my 2 cents canadian.
 
I have the Ikon and a 0.58 M6TTL upgraded to MP Finder. If it were just one camera, I would suggest the Ikon/35mm f/2.0 lens kit. I own many fine lenses, but I love everything about this lens and it is tack sharp at f/2.0. The Ikon has the best finder going. I use a grip with every camera that I have and this makes both cameras very nice to handle. When using my really fast 50mm or 90mm lenses (yes Ikon has 85mm frame line) I use an eyepiece magnifier which makes the finder much like my M3, but brighter. The Ikon is a bit noisier, but you don't have to worry about the sun frying the shutter. The M6 feels more solid. The meter on off is much nicer with the Ikon and exposure compensation is great. I also have a R4A and I'm guessing that this camera shares most parts with the Ikon. Again, it feels less sturdy, but so far no problem and you save yourself lots of money. The R4A is great for 28mm/35mm when you wear glasses. Narrow rangefinder makes it a poor choice for f/1.4. The viewfinder is a slight step down from the Ikon. It also has manual frame selection, but this series of cameras are really the best value of the group. I have had both of my Ikons for about a year and I'm about to send them in for warranty work. Both viewfinders are a bit off at distance. My M6TTL had a bad meter and I had to put a good bit more money in it to get it working properly. You can't go wrong with either camera, but absolutely get the Zeiss lens.. it is really special. You can pick up heavier, larger big glass later.

Here is a current thread. The Zeiss is the first photo. Put this lens together with Ektar 100 and you have perfection...if you can manage the exposure.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1374677#post1374677
 
Last edited:
People will tell you the ZI has the "best" finder, etc. However, there are two aspects to this:

Together with the Bessas it has the brightest finder, but less patch contrast than M2 or M6 with MP finder. Either might be more useful, depending on what you shoot. If you shoot in daytime with wide angles, the ZI finder is superior. If I shoot in the dark with long and/or fast lenses, I prefer M2, M3 or MP finder any time.

Roland.
 
Zi

Zi

Hi Eddie, got the same doubt myself some time ago.

I loved my M6, was my dream camera but sold it and got a ZI.
Have to say i always miss the m6 until i shoot with the ZI,now the m6 is a nostalgic feeling for me!

The ZI is quick, precise, lightweight.
The Viewfider is incredible, i read many opinions about it, but nothing compared to the practical use of it!
Rangefinder patch is ok, a little less contrast than the m6 but much better flare resistance than the m6!
The AE is nice, not only faster but has lock too!
both 35mm and 28mm lenses are just so comfortable to use with the ZI even so 21mm without VF.

Cheers!
 
I haven't had a contrast problem with the Ikon, but it absolutely requires that your eye remain centered to get a good view of the split image. The M6/M3/M4 .. don't have any others.. keep the patch split image when the eye is decentered. The longer rangefinder base is a plus for the Ikon, but it might have a tad less magnification than the std. 0.72 M6. I only have fast 50 & 90, so the M3 (once I get it back from DAG) will be my first choice for these lenses. I would love a fast 35mm. Wife has cutoff my allowance, so it will have to wait.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom