Zeiss Ikon - I want it, but can't justify it.

If you truly feel that you need a fully mechanical camera, keep the M3 -- then buy the Ikon and sell the Bessa and IIIf to assuage your feelings of guilt.
 
Krosya said:
So, where would I get one (if I do decide to do so), where there is a reasonable return policy (if there is such a place)? In US.
Advice?
thanks
Click to expand...

For the best price & service: our sponsor Tony Rose at Popflash.
 
I know this forum is really for those with equipment lust, but the real question is: will a different camera body improve your pictures?

I considered going from the Bessa R to a bayonet mount because of the several times I've missed a picture while fussing with screwing in a new lens. The Zeiss was an obvious choice, but the longer baseline really isn't a concern since the majority of my pix are taking with 50mm or less.

I have used AE on my MF camera and it is a time saver, especially when shooting color negative where the latitude is greater and average metering usually gets into the ballpark.
 
robertdfeinman said:
I know this forum is really for those with equipment lust, but the real question is: will a different camera body improve your pictures?

Well, maybe. If it handles better, gives me more options, etc. Bessa R , while a good camera, was not for me in many way as I like fast and/or lenses. With short RF base Bessa R is not good enough.
I got M3 for that. Well, M3 limits me for those wide shots. So, I need/want to find a camera that will do it all for me. M3 is pretty close. M2 and M4 seem to be nice options as well. MP - yes, but waaaaaay overpriced. So, I looked at Ikon. It just about fits the bill, but there are those things that I talked about before.
Once I find a camera that does all the things for me that I want - it should improve my pictures. Will it? One way to find out.
Click to expand...
 
robertdfeinman said:
I know this forum is really for those with equipment lust, but the real question is: will a different camera body improve your pictures?
Click to expand...
Well, that's the toughie, isn't it?

In more than a few past camera purchases, I'd told myself the motivation was "better pictures"; the definition of "better" was rather hazy, but at least part of the expectation on my part was that the hardware was going to somehow offer a "way" to better pictures, although the real reasoning was that I was bored with the gear...a sure sign that I wasn't concentrating on the most important part of the process.

The best thing a given camera/lens combination can do is get out the way of your mind's eye, but each of us has to come to terms with how that works out in terms of particulars. As Joe Jackson once put it, you can't get what you want 'till you know what you want.


- Barrett
 
Last edited:
I don't think a new camera of the same type will "improve" pictures a great deal. A different type of camera or different format may have a significant impact however.
 
Finder said:
I don't think a new camera of the same type will "improve" pictures a great deal. A different type of camera or different format may have a significant impact however.
Click to expand...

I'd agree with this statement. The thing that improved my 35mm photography the most was learning to shoot my Speed Graphic... :eek: :bang: :bang: :bang: :D

William
 
Let me put my 2 cents in here as a pro that's shot a great number of cameras both mechanical an electronic for over forty years. Obviously I started shooting with all mechanical cameras including Leic M's and in the later 70's I purchased 2 canon AT-1 bodies that were all electronic. Since then I've had a mix of electronic and mechanical cameras. In this I've had Rollei 3003's, Pentax ME, Nikon F3's, F4's, F5, F100 and a Zeiss Ikon that were electronic in some way. I have shot Leica M's for nearly four decades and great mechanical wonders like the Rollei SL-66's for over twenty five years. My Rollei 3003's were disasters but that was due to poor engineering and choice of materials and only gave mechanical problems, no electronic issues. My F4's took a great deal of use. I probably shot over 10,000 rolls through them and finally turned them into saw dust inside. There was never an electronic issue. A few things broke like latches but that was all. None of my electronic gear ever had a electronic issue. My trusted Rollei SL-66's served me well for over 25 years untill I finall wore them out. Tens of thousands of rolls through them and on some days I shot as many as 75 rolls. It finally gor to the point they were breaking down regularly and repairs were getting tougher to find parts. The moral to this story is my electronic equipment has really never failed even under very heavy pro use. My problems have always been mechanical. My Rollei SL-66's proved that mechanical parts are not always going to be available any more than electronic. I will also add that I've never missed a shot because of a battery going dead.

Now in my commercial business I shoot 98% digital with Canon 1DsII's and over the seven years of digital shooting with various brands I have never had an electronic failure. I think my current canons have over 100,000 acuations on each body with no problems.

One last thing, I have 5 M's and have shot M's for many years and absolutely love them. I even ourchased 2 new MP's this year and have run a great deal of film through them. I will probably never be without atleast 2 M's. My wife gave me a new ZI last month for my birthday. I love the camera and now carry it routinely over my M's. I can very few faults with it. The RF / VF is the finest I've used. The shutter is a different sound than the M but it's very quiet. The auto feature and meter are dead on. It simply functions like a fine camera should and feels great in the hand. I like the film loading but so not dislike the M4 rapid load in all the newer M's. I just dislike the removal and handling of the bottom plate of the M's. The ZI is very well made from magnesium and lighter than the M. Batteries are cheap and easily found. My onlu complaint is the position of the shutter speed readout in the VF and the lov visibility of VF shutter speed readout in the VF in bright light. It's been no problem since I only use it on auto and probably always will. I have my complaints about leica too so no camera is perfect but the ZI is close.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Magus this time. Why do you need justification? Who's asking for it?

Now, if you feel guilty about spending the money... just don't do it. If you don't, try the camera, see if you like it first. You can always return it or sell it.

Take care! :)
 
Next time you step on an airplane think about the reliability of electronics. Ofcourse there are backup systems on aircraft but virtually every governing system on modern aircraft is electronic. I've been a pilot for many years and had a serious problem trusting the autopilot in the beginning. Now using the autopilot coupled to the GPS is the norm on longer trips and particulartly relieves the work load during instrument flight. I see auto in electronic cameras the same as I see autopilots in aircraft. The auto function allows us to concentrate on other aspects of the process like creativity in photography.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom