Should Zeiss re-introduce the Ikon ZM?

I don't know who's ZM has been fragile because mine certainly hasn't been. I know for a fact that I have put over 800 rolls of film (826 and still counting) and it is still going strong. You guys have been believing the camera reviewers again. :D

My M6 has had more trips to the shop than this ZM. Sometimes if I forget to shut the shutter off it will eat batteries a bit quicker than I like, but I have no mechanical or electrical issues of any kind. This thing has been an absolute tank. I bought a new one as a spare about the time Zeiss discontinued them that hasn't even been out of the box. If this is fragile I wish I had more fragile cameras.

I put a nice Mr. Zhou leather half case on it a couple of years ago (long enough back I can't remember exactly when I bought it) but I certainly do not pamper it. The only camera I own that I know has gone through more film than my ZM is my K1000.

Are you sure you people haven't been drinking some of that Leica Koo-lade again?
 
michaelwj said:
Yet there are TWO (successful) kickstarter campaigns currently running for 35mm SLRs. It's not so much need but want, and there is always a market - the success is just determined by marketing.
Click to expand...
two campaigns? which ones? how many backers in each?
marketing does not determine success in ANY way.
 
DanskDynamit said:
two campaigns? which ones? how many backers in each?
Click to expand...

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/reflexcamera/reflex-bringing-back-the-analogue-slr-camera 419 backers £127k of £100k with 21 days to go

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/692391811/elbaflex-35mm-true-analog-camera-history-reloaded 59 backers $30k of $50k pledged, 18 days to go (I think it's a 21 day campaign). This campaign seems to suffer from a high barrier to entry with the minimum spend to get a reward is now $529, the early bird 24h special is now over.

I would say that's two successful campaigns running simultaneously.

DanskDynamit said:
marketing does not determine success in ANY way.
Click to expand...

Is that why the Bessa and the ZI both sold for less than the M when they are far from inferior cameras and yet weren't financially viable? They were canned because they didn't sell, while the M-A is selling well by all accounts, and the MP and M7 sold well before that. I bet Leica sold way more M7s than Zeiss sold ZIs. Marketing is everything, it's naive to think otherwise.
 
oh please those campaigns are a joke.
The first one has backers for $1, actually from the 419 backers, only 162 paid for the camera.
The second campaign is just marketing, we all know what is the product they sell and that those 50K are just to make it look successful, or you think you can start a camera production with $50K??
Its like thinking "new" film production is easy and successful because JCH's "Street Pan".
I wont get into comparing products because each of us has an opinion on what is "superior" and what is "inferior". Cosina's Ikon ZM did not sell well because of bad timing, back in 2005 people were crazy about switching to digital.
I dont have the official sale numbers from Leica and Cosina, but I would never state an opinion on what I bet on.
If marketing is everything, then I think I will have to review my MBA's notes from last year, I'm sure I can find something about the topic. :)
 
I'm sure you can find something about marketing, you probably should review it when you find it. The fact is Leica are still making an inferior camera to the ZI and the Bessas, yet Codina and Zeiss couldn't sell theirs. When an inferior product sells for more cash over a longer period of time than its competitors that's marketing.
Those campaigns are a joke? The first one has been 127% funded, the second has 60% funding in a few days. Whatever, go back to your MBA. Call me when you're successful and I'll be sure to judge you.
 
And lets not forget the Konica Hexar RF ... not quite a match in the finder department for the ZM but what a brilliant camera!
 
The reason I believe behind the limited commercial success of lower priced M mount rangefinders is the relative lack of lower priced lenses to put on it. Of course there are a few, but compared to SLR lenses, it might as well be none. While Zeiss and Voigtlander do their best to provide a lower cost option, the cheapest new lens is still close to $400 (2.5/35 CV).
 
I think Zeiss should bring back the ZM if they could sell it new for less than $1,500. At that price point, the cost would be less than a good used M6 or M7, and I'd feel a lot more comfortable spending that amount on a brand new camera than a 10+ year old camera that is likely to need servicing.
 
AAlfano said:
I think Zeiss should bring back the ZM if they could sell it new for less than $1,500..
Click to expand...

I think that's part of the problem – I don't think Zeiss could reintroduce the ZM in 2017 at that price point. Even at that price you are in the territory of a used M7 and above the cost of a good M2 or M4. I know there is the attraction (and reassurance) of buying something new but I think, for many, a used Leica will always trump a new not-a-Leica.
 
Swift1 said:
Ahh, okay I get that now. When I read it I thought he was saying he'd rather have a new model.
Click to expand...

Actually I was saying I'd rather have a new model...the ZI is very nice (bought it twice) but there is still room for improvements.

Since it's not gonna happen anyway I was just letting the dream go wild...
 
michaelwj said:
The reason I believe behind the limited commercial success of lower priced M mount rangefinders is the relative lack of lower priced lenses to put on it. Of course there are a few, but compared to SLR lenses, it might as well be none. While Zeiss and Voigtlander do their best to provide a lower cost option, the cheapest new lens is still close to $400 (2.5/35 CV).
Click to expand...

I think the main reason is as many people had stated in this thread: as new film cameras (which already sits in the niche of a niche), they have to compete against thousands of excellent and cheaper used film cameras. The case is especially harsh for the ZI as it's a M mount camera but not a Leica. Many people would (and had) opt (opted) for a used M6 for less, or a M7 for slightly more. These new film cameras even had to compete with themselves. Many (myself included) would just get a used ZI which usually sold for around $800 for many years...

After all, film cameras that had reached their evolutionary dead end won't get outdated - there is little drive for the consumers to update. Here in the land of the dead newer doesn't mean better. It's a virtue we often praise when compared to (the fast rotting) digital cameras, but it also spells the cameras' own demise.
 
michaelwj said:
I'm sure you can find something about marketing, you probably should review it when you find it. The fact is Leica are still making an inferior camera to the ZI and the Bessas, yet Codina and Zeiss couldn't sell theirs. When an inferior product sells for more cash over a longer period of time than its competitors that's marketing.
Those campaigns are a joke? The first one has been 127% funded, the second has 60% funding in a few days. Whatever, go back to your MBA. Call me when you're successful and I'll be sure to judge you.
Click to expand...

yawn.........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom