Who bought a ZI because it WASN'T a Leica

[Quercus]

Just wondering how many bought a ZI because it is a zeiss and for me a link back to the Contax, I even bought a bessa because it was a voigtlander (OK yes but spiritually) not because I could use l39 or M lenses on a cheaper body. Personally I have never coverted a Leica , thats not saying they are not great cameras but as a Contax/Rollei/Voigtlander/Contax Y user a ZI makes sense on its own...and yes using an M bayonet is also sense as the tooling is simpler and you can attrached thoose who have made the `Leica choice

 

[Arvay]

Buying ZI I didn't think of Leica. I was thinking of its features (viewfinder, AE-mode, easy film loading, possibility of 2 stops compensation). I'm using it with pleasure and it's more convenient for me than my M6...

 

[Keith]

When I chose to buy the Ikon I already had a Hexar RF which in my opinion is a better camera than any equivalent Leica has produced to date.

I'm not really of the opinion that the Ikon is a better camera than the Hexar but it still got my money ... partly yes because it wasn't a Leica ... also because it's a fine photographic tool that doesn't command a premium price attached to a name.

[edit[ ... and it has the best viewfinder in the gallaxy. (that must always be mentioned with an Ikon!)

 

[Doug]

Not because it wasn't a Leica, but because of the great view/rangefinder and its other attributes. IOW, I wasn't AVOIDING buying a Leica when I chose the ZI.

 

[Roger Hicks]

All right, I can see a romantic attachment to the ZI and Voigtländer names, and the appeal of the ZI finder, and the advantages of spending less money; but these are all positive reasons for buying ZI/Voigtländer.

What I can't see is the logic of negative reasons. Why would anyone deliberately avoid buying a Leica for any reason other than reverse snobbery?

Cheers,

R.

 

[Keith]

All right, I can see a romantic attachment to the ZI and Voigtländer names, and the appeal of the ZI finder, and the advantages of spending less money; but these are all positive reasons for buying ZI/Voigtländer.

What I can't see is the logic of negative reasons. Why would anyone deliberately avoid buying a Leica for any reason other than reverse snobbery?

Cheers,

R.

Reverse snobbery ... I like that!

Read ... pro-active minimalism! 😛

 

[infrequent]

reverse snobbery or not but part of the reason why i got the hexar was that it wasn't leica. i just decided to go for the hot mistress instead of the ugly wife. ; )

http://www.dantestella.com/technical/hexarrf.html

 

[mfunnell]

I'm, well, sort of where Keith is. If I didn't have a Hexar RF I'd almost certainly have a ZI, but for the feature mix rather than any, um, disLeica of cameras from Solms/Wetzlar. As it happens, the combination of Hexar RF and Leica M3 seems to suit my RF needs very well. Each for features and modes of operation the other doesn't have. Every once in a while I think a camera "part way between" the two I use regularly might be nice, and think of a ZI. But, so far, that's produced an "out, damned GAS" reaction. This may change, but so far I'm up one:zip on ZI GAS...which is why I'll never look through its viewfinder again!

...Mike

 

[Keith]

reverse snobbery or not but part of the reason why i got the hexar was that it wasn't leica. i just decided to go for the hot mistress instead of the ugly wife. ; )

http://www.dantestella.com/technical/hexarrf.html

I can't believe I've had my Hexar all this time and have never read that article! 😱 Sometimes I get the overpowering urge to buy another one as a back up just in case the one I have dies on me and I can't get by without it!

... you guys go on ahead ... Sunny and I will just hang around here and wax lyrical about our Konicas! 😛

 

[Quercus]

maybe the thread title is misleading - I actually like leicas just never wanted one they had no place for me - yes a contax IIIa is old but it did what it said on the tin for me. An yes Roger there is a great deal of nostalgia in what we buy as a camera..and at times snobbery.. the demise of the OM system.. as pentax as a real competitor even with some outstanding cameras in the past and certainly in the present..

Certainly for me the reason for firstly purchasing a Bessa R2 was that it could act like a more up to date olympus RC/RD with the benefit of interchangeable lenses and would also replace my IIIa as i got more lenses.

To me the ZI is a direct successor of the Contax system not an alternative to leica - I guess we could ask why does anyone now avoid buying the ZI in favour of the M7 (and yes there are lots of reasons) other than snobbery

 

[infrequent]

@keith - all this gushing is not helping the prices and thereby the backup hexar rf! we are close to hitting the 10 year mark of their production and hope we are good for another 10!

btw, i just realised my hexar rf has a older serial than dante's. not sure how many times it has changed hands but don't think it was used much.

until about yesterday i was thinking that rangefinders are just exotic but now appreciate their benefits. the scene was indoors with the curtains closed and only available light. here i was taking shots at ISO200 (neopan ss exposed for diafine), 1/8 shutter speeds and hand-holding the camera. the clincher was my subjects posing for the shot while i had already snapped couple of candids. now that's an epiphany!

 

[micromontenegro]

LOL, I didn't buy a ZI because it has M mount, i.e. it is too Leica for me. When they announced it, I almost couldn't sleep: finally, a succesor for my Contax. But nope, they made it M mount, can you believe it? If they did one in Contax mount, I'd buy it in a second.

Yes, cameras are much more than tools to me, and I have a powerful sentimental attachment to the brand I've been using and enjoying over almost 40 years. And also, I have all the lenses!

And also (crucify me if you will) I have a strong dislike for anything Leica. So sue me ;-)

 

[Keith]

maybe the thread title is misleading - I actually like leicas just never wanted one they had no place for me - yes a contax IIIa is old but it did what it said on the tin for me. An yes Roger there is a great deal of nostalgia in what we buy as a camera..and at times snobbery.. the demise of the OM system.. as pentax as a real competitor even with some outstanding cameras in the past and certainly in the present..

Certainly for me the reason for firstly purchasing a Bessa R2 was that it could act like a more up to date olympus RC/RD with the benefit of interchangeable lenses and would also replace my IIIa as i got more lenses.

To me the ZI is a direct successor of the Contax system not an alternative to leica - I guess we could ask why does anyone now avoid buying the ZI in favour of the M7 (and yes there are lots of reasons) other than snobbery

I'm struggling to think of reasons to buy the M7 over the ZI. :angel:

Having owned an M7 it certainly has a presence that the Zeiss lacks and the metering is a little better readability wise ... but the shutter as quiet as it is, is a design dating back to the mid twenties. Freedom of choice is a great thing and we are currently spoiled for choices with good rangefinders when you consider what a niche market it is in reality! With the price rise of the Ikon putting it within a few hundred dollars of a good secondhand M7 it's quite a jump from the Bessa if you decide that you want the best AE rangefinder available.

Then of course there's the Hexar which although being the best of the three to my mind ... has the disadvantage of being a discontinued model with potential future service problems.

As exclusive as the Leicas appear to be at times there are certainly plenty of available repairers dotted around the globe!

 

[mfunnell]

Sometimes I get the overpowering urge to buy another one as a back up just in case the one I have dies on me and I can't get by without it!

I did that ages ago!

...Mike

 

[noimmunity]

Will the next thread be asking if people bought a Bessa because it's not a Zeiss nor a Leica?

 

[mfogiel]

Well I bought the ZI because it DID NOT COST like e Leica... When I finally also bought a Leica (M7), I actually understood that ZI was also a better photographic tool than Leica, so I think my reasoning of "rewarding" a competitive yet not overpriced camera was right. My luck also is, that I find the Zeiss lenses more to my liking than the Leica ones, so on this count I don't ever have to feel I am overpaying for the very best.

 

[ljsegil]

I first bought an M7 when I wanted to get into rangefinder photography, found I was not enjoying it that much, but then later decided to try the ZI because of the reviews of the viewfinder/rangefinder. When I got to use the ZI, I found I truly enjoyed rangefinder photography, a feeling I had not gotten using the M7. Suffice to say I sold the M7 and have lived happily ever after with my ZI. I have other rangefinder camera systems and lenses, but they see little use as I so enjoy shooting with the ZI--I am going to have to make a conscious effort to force myself to take advantage of the rest of my collection. It's just natural to me now, when I want to shoot, I go for the ZI.
LJS

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . I am going to have to make a conscious effort to force myself to take advantage of the rest of my collection.

Why force yourself?

There are several reasons I don't get rid of my unused cameras. Many are not worth all that much. It's a hassle to sell them. And they might come in handy for an article.

But if I were just taking pictures for pleasure, my Leicas have it all for 35mm and digi, and in MF I'd cut it down to Alpa, Linhof and one SLR.

Cheers,

R.

 

[italy74]

Probably, a Leica is a "Leica", something on its own. Zeiss Ikon is (to me) a perfect RF camera, the best "compromise" where everyone can find both excellent quality, features and a good price. Even if I'd like having a Leica as each one of us would like a Ferrari or a Viper, that is a status symbol, I'll surely go for a Zeiss Ikon, as soon as I will be able to. Again, I think it's a better "compromise" (! said and read with a grain of salt, of course)

 

[Thardy]

Will the next thread be asking if people bought a Bessa because it's not a Zeiss nor a Leica?

That's easy, cost. But it only makes you want a Leica more.