will this be satisfactory?

T

thegf

Established
Local time
2:41 PM
Joined
Dec 17, 2010
Messages
163
i am currently an m6 user, with the following lenses: 35 f2.5 color skopar II, 50 f2 planar, and voigt 40 f1.4. i am thinking of making a switch to one body/one lens.

would i be happy with a zeiss ikon + biogon 35 f2? i really like the planar, but i'm more a fan of the 35mm focal length. also, it seems that the zeiss has better framelines for 35mm; i'm not the biggest fan of those on the m6.

anyone have similar experiences? :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you should keep what you have. The M6 is a great camera. The ZI finder is a little brighter but the build quality sucks. The lenses you have now are fine. I see no point to the one lens fad, its limiting, but if you want to try it, just leave the other lenses at home. You WILL regret selling them later.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ZI+35/2 Biogon is probably the most sure fire combo I've ever used, especially if you shoot in the f 2.8-5.6 range most of the time, as this will deliver fast shutter speeds, incredible sharpness and a very pleasant in and out of focus rendering.The 35m frame of ZI is simply beyond anything else in RF photography. However, for one body one lens decision, I'd personally go with the 35/1.2 Nokton, which is simply more versatile. It balances very well on the ZI body, and loaded with Tri X it will let you shoot virtually in any light conditions. It is my preferred low light combo, but it also excels in portraiture and close range shots. I disagree that ZI build quality sucks - there is simply more engineering effort in things like VF or shutter and less in overweight outer shell. For optimum user comfort, i recommend a Luigi case with grip, which protects the body, makes vertical shots easier, and dampens the shutter sound, which is slightly more metallic than in a Leica.
 
Last edited:
The ZI finder is a little brighter but the build quality sucks.
Click to expand...
After all, it all depends on self preferences, I like my ZI and didn't feel the build quality is that bad, it is lighter than M, but well made!
 
I think the trio 35-40-50 is indeed a bit redundant.
I would either sell the 40 or both the other ones and get a 28.
BTW, I know that the M6 frames are a bit too small compared to the real 35mm FOV, and the internet folklore says a 40mm is a better match for them.
 
thegf said:
....would i be happy with a zeiss ikon + biogon 35 f2? ....
Click to expand...

I know little about the Zeiss Ikon, and couldn't comment on your happiness, but I have Experience of the 35mm Colour Skopar. I replaced it with a Zeiss 35mm C-Biogon f2.8 and the improvement was happily remarkable. I recommend you give serious consideration to the C-Biogon, it is the lens I constantly use on an M8 and it is a delight.

Do you know this enthusiastic appraisal of the Zeiss Ikon by Mike Johnston ?

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/zeiss-.html

.......... Chris
 
Frances prefers the ZI; I prefer the MP. It's that personal, when we've had both side by side. I don't care for the upside-down rewind and the meter readout, despite the excellent viewfinder. Frances argues for the finder and also maintains that she can hold a ZI steadier. We'd both back the Biogon as a superb lens, but don't own one because she doesn't use a 35mm lens much (prefers her 50/2.5 Summarit) and I have an old Summilux.

Cheers,

R.
 
i'm thinking that the m6 and 40 1.4 may be adequate. i may sell the others and use the cash for digital stuff. wtf.
 
I think there's real redundancy in your kit. I just sold my 50 Summicron, and am down to a 35/2.8 C-Biogon and an M6, neither of which I'll ever sell. If I do get another M-mount lens it will be a Zeiss 18, 21, or 25. But I've handled the ZI and nice frame lines or no, I'd never trade my M for one. Just doesn't feel right.
 
I love my Zeiss Ikon and Color Skopar 35mm f2.5 I shoot all my pictures with that one lens and camera. You can check out the photos on my site at www.dwayneburgessphotography.com. But before I bought my Zeiss I was going to get the M6 0.72x and When I looked through the viewfinder I though hmmm pretty damn cool. Then I checked out the Zeiss and It blew me away. I then went home did some research on them here lol and via google search and came to my decision. And now the Zeiss and 35 2.5 goes everywhere with me. Build quality is damn tuff. I was shooting with it riding my bike and dropped it. Yea I had to get it repaired but no dent's nothing. Great camera and I'll shoot it over the M6 any day, would love an M9 too.
 
Pretty much the only 35mm RF gear I use anymore is the ZM 35/2 on the ZI. It's a pretty fantastic combination.

The ZI doesn't feel as solid as an M (but what does?), but it does feel very well built and I personally really enjoy using it. The viewfinder is the best of any RF IMO, and I like the feel of the shutter speed/exposure compensation dial. I recommend a mini soft-release.
 
The biogon 35 f2 is an excellent lens, and the Ikon is an enjoyable camera with a wonderful viewfinder. They're a great match.
 
All three of your lenses are very good, and of course the M6 is a fine camera too. I agree with Chris Crawford that you could set the Planar and Nokton aside, maybe boxed up at the back of the shelf, and use the 35 Color Skopar on the M6 and be happy. It's said to give results reminiscent of the pre-ASPH Summicron 35... Pretend you don't have the other two, and if you haven't used them for a year (or your choice of some other interval), sell them as unneeded. You might develop a need for a 24mm or 75mm, and the sale money would then be welcome... :D
 
I disagree that the ZI build sucks. It is however inferior to the leica build. The finder is fantastic. Unless you truly want AE it is likely a sideways move to leave the M6. The lenses you have are great. I use the Biogon c now but have had the skopar in the past. I wish I still had it and the loose change I spent on the upgrade. The Skopar is as good as I need a 35mm lens to be for film work. YMMV
 
I've had an M6 and a ZI, much prefer the ZI. I preferred how it worked, with AE etc. and the finder made the M6's look like a disposable. The M6 is perhaps better built, but if it is, it's not by much. For me, the M6 lacks the modernity of the ZI, and the charm of older Leicas. I'd take a ZI in heartbeat over the M6, it's just a nicer camera.

I agree it's sideways move from an M6, but so many cameras are, but still worthwhile changes. I moved from M6 to M3 (which could be considered a downgrade), and I find the M3 *so* much nicer, a true pleasure.
 
Taken it from one who has screwed up because of GAS more that anything you could imagine: (now repeat after me).........NEVER sell lenses, NEVER!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom