Zeiss Ikon, Convince Me

A long time I was convinced I would buy a M6 and nothing else. By chance I could have a look through the VF of a ZI and changed my mind. Mine was perfect out of the box and after ~40 rolls I'm thinking about a second body.

About spare parts: I don't know the future and it is possible there will be no spare parts in 20 years. But it is also possible that you can not get spare parts for a M because Leica does not exist any more.
 
The AE of the Zeiss Ikon is far more modern and precise than this light meter methology out of the 70' of my Leica MP. Simply trust the AE and shoot away!
Click to expand...

I find AE of M7 much precise with black and white, Zeiss ikon overexposes most of the time, I read somewhere zeiss ikon exponometer is configured for slide`s, so it overexposes 🙂
 
Nachkebia said:
I find AE of M7 much precise with black and white, Zeiss ikon overexposes most of the time, I read somewhere zeiss ikon exponometer is configured for slide`s, so it overexposes 🙂
Click to expand...
Is this just hear-say, or is this a valid concern about B&W and the ZI -- from the discussion on this thread I am getting the impression that there are a lot of scared "believers of the red dot" who can't fathom that the "one religion" may have encountered a worthy competitor🙂 ?

Running for cover :angel:
 
i shoot 100% b&w and mostly on ae and have had no concerns so far.

of course, i may not pass muster with nach because i'm just a weekend shooter and have not sold enough pics to be a professional.

🙂
 
Last edited:
Nachkebia said:
I find AE of M7 much precise with black and white, Zeiss ikon overexposes most of the time, I read somewhere zeiss ikon exponometer is configured for slide`s, so it overexposes 🙂
Click to expand...

If the ZI is really configured for slides, shouldn't it then underexpose B&W???

Have not recognized that the AE of the ZI over/underexposes. But ... maybe that will become the same thing as the C-Sonnar's front focus .... I should not read those threads 😱
 
Nachkebia said:
I find AE of M7 much precise with black and white, Zeiss ikon overexposes most of the time, I read somewhere zeiss ikon exponometer is configured for slide`s, so it overexposes 🙂
Click to expand...

Comparing my Leica MP pictures to those taken with my Zeiss Ikon it is very obvious that the latter is the most correctly exposed. The only off-tendency I can see is the ZI's tendency to underexpose landscape scenes with the wide angle Biogon 25 mm 2,8 with a lot of sky in the picture. - But then again, it depends what you want to be correctly exposed in such scenes. While my Leica MP pictures could be 'all over the place' exposure wise.

The reason the Zeiss Ikon is more correct is simple: - What I am comparing here is the automatics of the Zeiss Ikon to my own ability to judge wether I should over- or underexpose. Because when using the MP - which has no AE setting, I have to judge myself wether to choose the camera's red dot setting or something up or down.
 
I'm just worried that if I bought a Zeiss Ikon, I might like it better than my Ms and not use them as much any more. Which would be a shame. So I'm not even going to look through the ZI viewfinder.

colin
 
So, nasmformyzombie,

have all these posts helped? Are you convinced one way or the other?

What I think you want is an M7. Get a loan or something! 🙂

BTW. nasm for my zombie? Is that the netwide assembler? Very strange.


colin
 
I compared the ZI M metering with my Nikon F3 a few times. I would get close to the subject (a wall, for instance) to insure the semi-spot meter of the F3 and the wide-center weighted meter of the ZI read the same areas. I found both cameras were essentially the same (within 1/2 stop) over a wide range of EVs.

Exposure compensation is a breeze to use with the ZI, so it would be trivial to use AE with diverse film types. In fact, I have to remind myself to use exposure compensation more often.

willie
 
when i use a hand held meter while street shooting i take my readings off the ground/street and like what i get on the pics.

when shooting with the zi, i often point down and hit the ae lock button and do the same.
 
colinh said:
I'm just worried that if I bought a Zeiss Ikon, I might like it better than my Ms and not use them as much any more. Which would be a shame. So I'm not even going to look through the ZI viewfinder.

colin
Click to expand...
Colin I wouldn't worry about it too much. I use Ms and I've looked through a ZI finder and it is very good. But overall I'm comfortable with the bodies I use and I've really got used to them so what's the point in changing?
 
i think that's a good point peter, ya gotta be comfortable with what you are using.
all else aside, the finder on the zi has ruined me for other cameras.
not to say i will never buy or use another camera but they will be a let down for me in the finder department.
 
I am only kidding, I know there's more to it than this, but.... my Zorki 4's have REALLY bright viewfinders that are life-size (100%, no reduction). And they have very bright, contrasty rangefinder patches. We won't talk about build quality though 🙄
 
That was a long post, but I must say you are very wrong with your statement that Konica never developed a full product line for the Hexar RF.

There is an everready case for the Hexar RF, diopters exist, a lens shade is included with every lens, a separate viewfinder is also included with the lens when framelines is not available on the body, and there is a flash.

I do not know what else you need to provide to be acknowledged as having a full product line? A best selling viewfinder-less camera body? 😕

Konica even produced film.. 🙂

There are also several LTM lenses available from Konica that can be adapted to M bodies like the Hexar RF.

I think it is a pity that Konica bought Minolta, thereby being bogged down by the SLR system.

People in north america seems to really hate the Hexar RF, we are not even allowed to have a forum on this site... 🙁

/Håkan

Huck Finn said:
[...]
Unlike the Hexar RF, the ZI is accompanied by a full product line. Two years after the introduction of the ZM lens line, it already offers twice as many lenses as the Hexar RF did when it was discontinued & they are supported by a selection Zeiss finders, lens shades, & a filter. Within a year after introduction of the ZI, there were a second ZI body, diopters, & an everready case all available from Zeiss. All of this represents a much more serious commitment to to this line than Konica ever showed towars the Hexar RF.
[...]
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom