Zeiss Ikon and lenses

[SaveKodak]

The ZI is a camera made basically with 1980's technology. During my stay in China I got to know a technician who could adjust the ZI's rangefinder. Not some rocket science, as now that me too can do it, and there's even a video on youtube teaching you how to do it.

I just don't get why people talk like it will fall apart the next moment and that's it. The camera is serviceable - Cosina is bound by law to continue supporting it for the next decade, after that, it will be as reliable as a Nikon F3. For now, the turnaround time and cost are very reasonable compared to, well, the go-to places we have for Leicas. Zeiss agents around globe send the cameras back to Nakano, Nagano - last time (it was 2011) it took my 100 euros or so for adjustment and a new bottom plate, and one month later it came back new. Imagine how much and how long it would take if you send your M to Wetzlar.

Just to be clear, i am not arguing that the ZI is poorly built. I had every indication that it was very well put together. It would be my preferred RF, bar none. I just think it has a design 'flaw', which is a little bit different. I just don't want to be without my camera for weeks or months for an RF adjustment, requiring international shipping.

As for that video, I've seen it. I'm not that technically savvy.

 

[mpaniagua]

Just to be clear, i am not arguing that the ZI is poorly built. I had every indication that it was very well put together. It would be my preferred RF, bar none. I just think it has a design 'flaw', which is a little bit different. I just don't want to be without my camera for weeks or months for an RF adjustment, requiring international shipping.

As for that video, I've seen it. I'm not that technically savvy.

Yeah, same thoughts about the video .... I've screwed enough lens and cameras playing the doctor to know better

Just sharing it so maybe someone find it useful.


Marcelo

 

[roscoetuff]

All this is helpful. So the argument is the M2 or an M4 is more rugged and more repairable in more places for almost the same $'s? What are the relative limits on comparable M's? Aside from the lens selection limits I'd want to have at least a 35, 50 and 90 range and not just 50 and up. Thoughts?

 

[kxl]

First question - do you want/need AE? If YES, then your only choice are the ZI, M7, CV Bessa's and Hexar RF. If NO, then you can add other bodies.

I have a couple of ZI's that I use with a variety of lenses from 21mm to 50mm. I used to shoot longer FL's (75mm, 90mm and 105mm), but decided at some point to stick to 50 and shorter for RF shooting -- just a personal preference at this time.

I'm not particularly hard on my gear so a high level of ruggedness was not a primary concern. As far as comparing M bodies, that's a whole 'nother thread.

 

[roscoetuff]

Quite a few nice shots on your website. You list yourself as a Nikonista... but diverge into ZI... and any others? Like the quote in your signature btw.

 

[jonmanjiro]

I came to the conclusion that the ZI is the best commercially available 'modern' film rangefinder with a fatal flaw.
<snip>
The RF WILL go out of alignment some time.

Some years ago (2008 maybe?) a well known US based seller of new Zeiss Ikon gear briefly advertised Zeiss Ikons with "new improved finder" on eBay. A thread (unfortunately since deleted by the OP) was started here and a conversion ensued as to what the improvement could possibly be. Before we figured it out, those eBay auctions were edited to remove the reference to the "new improved finder"and the whole story vanished down the memory hole. So we never did find out what the improvement was.

There are three batches Zeiss Ikons (serial numbers 1552xxx, 1559xx, 1561xxxx), each consisting of about 5,000 cameras. We speculated at the time that whatever changes were made for the "new improved finder" were implemented from the second batch.

I purchased a Zeiss Ikon (s/n 1561xxxx) new in early 2009 and used it heavily until I sold it mid last year. I took it traveling with me to dozens of countries, shot hundreds of rolls with it, and it never skipped a beat. I never needed to get its RF aligned. As far as I know, its still going strong in the hands of its new owner in Hong Kong. Probably the only camera I regret selling actually...

 

[kxl]

Quite a few nice shots on your website. You list yourself as a Nikonista... but diverge into ZI... and any others? Like the quote in your signature btw.

Thanks - yes, I definitely consider myself a Nikonista and have owned at least one Nikon SLR or DSLR since I bought an FE2 in the 1980's. But I also like to try other things, so I also use a ZI, a Sony A7R and a Sony RX100 Mark 5.

 

[superultramega]

I purchased an Ikon and ZM 35/2.8 a few months ago. I like everything about it except the meter readout on the left side of the viewfinder. Can be hard to read. Much prefer a readout below the frame lines.

 

[sepiareverb]

M2 has the slower load system like the M3: remove the take-up spool, attach the film to the take-up spool, insert the film. The M4 and up have the current type tulip for simpler loading: drop in the film, be sure the tail is between the arms of the tulip.

There is a retrofit for M2 & 3(?) cameras, so not a permanent thing, but an added expense.

The manual film counter on the M2 is another difference from the other M bodies, not awful by any means, but simply something to get used to.

35/50/90 frame lines are found in the M2, M4 (all three of them), M5, M6 (all of them), M7, MP. The .72 VF versions of the M6,7 & P would be a good match (IMO) for these three lenses, tho some might prefer the .85 VF.