why Zeiss Ikon rather than Bessa?

[manfred63]

Hello,

I am looking to buy a RF camera to 'come back' from digital which I still like and use a lot.
I have been looking around a bit and am now wondering what is the better way to start with:
Bessa R2 or R3 with 35mm or 40mm lens or
Zeiss Ikon with 35mm Biogon?

I know about the difference in price, but this is not a major issue, I buy them here quite cheap new.

So please give me your thoughts about why ZI rather than Bessa.

Thanks in advance

Manfred

 

[infrequent]

better build, better viewfinder, longer ebl -- three things that usually stands out in any ZI discussion.

 

[drjoke]

coolness factor.

every one asks you why your camera has the same brand as your nokia phone camera.

 

[denkrahm]

two weeks ago I handeld both and decided for the Bessa as good enough for me - I don't care for the name and don't 'throw' it around - and kept the rest of the money as a start for a digital RF, Leica or whatever else there may be in the future. But then money is not the issue and you are coming back from digital. For the looks, the ZM in my opinion is better.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Infrequent has it. Plus 'feel': the ZI is more comfortable in the hand.

Against the ZI: inferior meter to some Bessas (other Bessas have essentially the same meter). Objections to the meter: hard to read, wrong place for the readout, low resolution.

Cheers,

R.

 

[drjoke]

How is meter inferior? Is it not as accurate? Or is it just harder to read?

 

[Keith]

I just think the meter is a little hard to get used to ... as Roger said the readout is poorly positioned and p*ss week in strong light. Aside from that it's metering as such seems OK to me. My Hexar's meter is far superior though!

Roger is hard to please though! 😛

As for choice between a Bessa and an Ikon I'd have the Ikon every time ... the Bessa has a cheap look to me!

 

[noimmunity]

Subjective feel better in ZI

Subjective feel better in ZI

ZI: even easier film loading; better after-market side grip (lighter in weight); batteries seem to last longer (both last long); better position (for me, anyway) for the exposure lock; easier to preview framelines (but with the Bessa you gain some flexibility in certain situations by being able to set the framelines manually); more satisfying film advance...

But the overwhelming advantage of the ZI is undoubtedly the Viewfinder. Did we mention the viewfinder?

 

[Maxapple88]

If you're saying you will get the Ikon with a Biogon and the Bessa with a different lens then definitely go for the Zeiss. The Biogon is amazing glass. Would go on the Bessa too tho... I guess the viewfinder is the major issue then, thats better on the Ikon.

 

[manfred63]

Dear all,

thank you for your thoughts; I could also mix Bessa camera with Zeiss lenses, I know; what about reliability of Bessa vs Zeiss Ikon cameras? Any advice.

Additional question, I would like to start with 1 lens and then see which one(s) to add; I thought about starting with 35mm. What are your thoughts about Biogon f2.0 vs Biogon f2.8 in 35mm?

Thank you

Manfred

 

[Bullwinkle]

I have both a ZI and a Bessa R3A, and haven't had a problem with either. That being said, I would definitely recommend the ZI over the R3A. Comparing the two, I just have a feeling that something is going to break inside the Bessa, and I don't have that feeling with the ZI. I would buy the ZI again, but I don't think I'd buy the Bessa again.

 

[drjoke]

Zeiss Ikon viewfinder is amazing. It's better than the DSLRs I have used. It's not only bigger, but provides more accurate focus.

 

[mfogiel]

I have the ZI, an M7, Bessa R3A and R4A.
My opinion is simple: If you get the ZI with the 35mm Biogon, then essentially there's nothing better present in the market today, nothing to "upgrade" to(including the Leicas). The camera has the best VF with single 35mm and 50mm frames, the lens is more distanced from the VF, so even with the hood on, the Biogon does not disturb your vision, the AE, once you learn how to use it ( find uot about the vertical coverage of the meter) is perfect, the shutter is pretty silent and it goes down to 1/2000th, the film loading is fast and hassle free, the body balances well on the strap (the bessas balance towards the body).
This particular combination: ZI+Biogon 35/2 is a rig that gives me a disproportionate amount of technically good results : good framing, accurate focus, excellent sharpness, bokeh and spatial reproduction.
My advice would be to get a Luigi half case with grip for it, because this way you improve the handling of the vertical shots and protect the alignement of your rf.

 

[kshapero]

I have had 2 Bessa's, R3A and R3M. Wonderful cameras. The ZI is butter smooth, looks better. The metering on both is dead on. I have NO problem with meter readout on the ZI except in harsh light.

 

[goo0h]

My advice would be to get a Luigi half case with grip for it, because this way you improve the handling of the vertical shots and protect the alignement of your rf.

How does this half case protect rf alignment?

Anyway, I too have a Bessa R3A and more recently a ZI. I like them both, but have to give the slight edge to the ZI, so far anyway. As others have said, the viewfinder is indeed nice, especially if you wear eyeglasses as I do. The ergonomics of the ZI is also really nice. Even just advancing the film feels more solid.

I guess the Bessa has an ever so slightly longer throw because I have found periodically I was going to take a shot with the Bessa, but the shutter wasn't fully cocked. I then went and made sure it was fully advanced, and of course could then fire the shutter as expected. Haven't really had that experience with the ZI or other cameras I've tinkered with. I don't think there's anything wrong with the Bessa, just a different feel.

I've also got large hands and find the more rectangular, slightly larger shape of the ZI fits better in my hands.

That being said, I still like the Bessa, especially the 1:1 finder of the R3A.

 

[italy74]

So, according to MFogiel, a ZI + 35mm could be the best "starter" kit?

 

[lZr]

I recomend you be more practial. If you are new to RF world, better to start with the best of the chip cameras, like Bessa R. Get yourself second hand camera and 35/2.5 Scopar and look trough the VF, shot and judge the results. May be you will miss the zoom and macro futures and will want to go back to your (D)SLR. Most of us not use flash. ZI and Leica guys say that f/1.4 is wide open enough to take night shots. SLR users know max f/2.8 as their best lenses. This is different world, that is better to enter careffuly
Good luck

 

[Roger Hicks]

How is meter inferior? Is it not as accurate? Or is it just harder to read?

Harder to read and (as I recall) +/- 1 stop resolution instead of the 'traffic lights' approach used in Leicas, the ZI SW and many Voigtländers, which can offer +/- 1/3 stop or +/- 1/2 stop, depending on how they are designed.

I gave it back a long time ago (I had it for review when it came out) so I may be misremembering. My wife remembers the same, though, and on re-reading the instruction book (which I kept) I see no indications to the contrary.

Cheers,

R.

 

[ferider]

The interesting thing is that ZI components made it back into the Bessa R[23]M and above. Look at the shutter and you will see.

Of course I'm in favor of long EBL. But besides that I have never understood why people claim the ZI finder is so much better than the Bessa's, the Bessa finders are pretty darn good. Also note how the patch behaves identically (doesn't move).

Roland.

 

[Sam N]

ZI: even easier film loading

Can someone elaborate on this? How is it different from the R3A for example?

The interesting thing is that ZI components made it back into the Bessa R[23]M and above. Look at the shutter and you will see.

Isn't the ZI's shutter electronically controlled? The R[23]M shutters do not require batteries, so how could they be the same? Anyway I don't think Cosina builds the shutters themselves. It could just be that the supplier updated their design.