zeiss ikon or m6

[jaffa_777]

my nikon f3 is on the blink, and have always wanted to buy a rangefinder for my 35mm work. Can't decide between a good cond leica m6 or the new zeiss ikon. Which would you buy and why?

 

[mfunnell]

Probably the ZI - AE, better film handling, better viewfinder - easier transition. Trouble is, a Leica M is so nice. I bought a Hexar RF for practicality and an M3 for "nice". You might try a ZI variation on that approach...

...Mike

 

[mfogiel]

If you don't wear glasses, then the choice is more even, if you do, ZI is a winner for its viewfinder.
There's another point too, I know people like mechanical cameras for the desert island mission, but seriously, for an amateur it doesn't make any difference.
The 35mm RF's are about the speed of framing and shooting, so creating an extra hassle with checking the exposure does not make sense to me - you might as well buy a MF camera for this.

 

[Timmy P]

If you don't wear glasses, then the choice is more even, if you do, ZI is a winner for its viewfinder.
There's another point too, I know people like mechanical cameras for the desert island mission, but seriously, for an amateur it doesn't make any difference.
The 35mm RF's are about the speed of framing and shooting, so creating an extra hassle with checking the exposure does not make sense to me - you might as well buy a MF camera for this.

True indeed, I felt the same way when I switched from my Bessa R3A to the M6. However, you definately do get used to switching the dial, and often in the street I don't find the exposure varying very wildly anyways. It also saves the pain of having to transfer the exposure by pressing that little button on the back of the Bessa, I'm glad I don't have to do that anymore.

Also, a huge advantage to the M6 I think if you're considering things like shooting candid environments is the level of noise an M6 makes. While I know the Ikon sounds slightly quiter than a Bessa, it's still not close to an M6, and the film advance of Bessa's are as loud as hell, with that clicky sound instead of the smooth advance of an M6.

But I'm not argueing for either, I love both the AE Bessa and all manual M6.

My advice, buy both :-D

Failing that, I'd go the M6 if it's the same price simply for the retro factor and like others have said, M6's are just total and utter machines, from the body down to how it functions. It's also questionable how durable Ikon's really are and parts availibility, where as we all know with all the M3's lieing around that are still able to be serviced, and that camera is 30 years older than the M6's!

However, if the Ikon is cheaper, I'd definately snatch it up instead. Simply economics really, mo' money means mo' lenses.

Def go with some CV lenses, they are supurb. While I enjoy Leica glass, like a very good second hand dealer said, whats the point of buying first hand Leica when it's so cheap second hand, with few if any comestic differences? And a lot of CV lenses are even cheaper than second hand Leica. I shudder to imagine the dark dim world rangefinders would be now without CV. A dark, hellishly expensive world full of over priced gear.

Anyway, hope I didn't ramble too much, and hope my advice makes your decision all the wiser!

Catch ya,

-Tim

 

[casualuser]

zm reliability?

zm reliability?

Is there a date or seriel number after which the overall quality is known to improve (i.e. led issues, rf alignment, etc as discussed in earlier forums)?

 

[jjovin]

I chose ZI

I chose ZI

I had an opportunity to have for several days both a ZI and an M6.
At the end I decided that ZI is a much better photographic tool.
Reasons are: significantly brighter view finder, easier film loading,
more information from an in camera light meter, AE lock is sometimes useful.
The numbers in the view finder showing exposure metering are not visible,
sometimes when the background of a scene is bright. For my photography,
that happens so rarely that I took it as an insignificant fact. The arrows on M6
are nicely positioned and give a bit of information about the exposure but not as much as a ZI.
Shutters on both are very quiet compared to a slap of a mirror on an SLR that,
the one on ZI being a bit louder is completely insignificant to me.
I doubt that it is going to interfere with any candid photography.
Reliability has not been a problem for me.
These are my reasons for choosing a new ZI over a used M6.
Let us know what you decide at the end.
Zoran

 

[x-ray]

I had an opportunity to have for several days both a ZI and an M6.
At the end I decided that ZI is a much better photographic tool.
Reasons are: significantly brighter view finder, easier film loading,
more information from an in camera light meter, AE lock is sometimes useful.
The numbers in the view finder showing exposure metering are not visible,
sometimes when the background of a scene is bright. For my photography,
that happens so rarely that I took it as an insignificant fact. The arrows on M6
are nicely positioned and give a bit of information about the exposure but not as much as a ZI.
Shutters on both are very quiet compared to a slap of a mirror on an SLR that,
the one on ZI being a bit louder is completely insignificant to me.
I doubt that it is going to interfere with any candid photography.
Reliability has not been a problem for me.
These are my reasons for choosing a new ZI over a used M6.
Let us know what you decide at the end.
Zoran

I second your statement. I've shot leicas for nearly 40 years and have 6 M's at the moment. I have a 6 and 3 MP's that I use daily and also have a ZI that I wouldn't trade for anything. The ZI is every bit the equal of the Leica and better in many ways as mentioned above. I shoot a great deal of film every week and have put a couple of hundred rolls through each of my bodies in the past year. In that year I've had absolutely no issues with my ZI or lenses and had a new MP and two leica lenses go to the shop for major mechanical issues.

 

[Bavaricus]

The ZI is every bit the equal of the Leica and better in many ways as mentioned above.

But the Leica FEELS so much better ... :angel:

 

[FrankS]

It's a purely subjective choice. I'm in the M6 camp. Quiet shutter is important for me. Also in terms of longevity, the M's have a proven track record, and if a repair is required, there is no problem. Should the Zi have a shutter issue, I'm not sure that the repair would be so straight forward. Then there are the electronics in the Zi. For myself, I tend to trust mechanics over electronics, but again that's jsut me. It will be interesting to see how the Zi fares over the long term. That information isn't there yet for the Zi and will only come over the next 20-50 years.

 

[cablesnarl]

I had to make the same decision a couple of months ago. For me, it was down to the M6 TTL .58 or the Ziess Ikon ZM. (I wear glasses). I tried both at a camera dealer.

The M6 that I tried felt great in my hands and I liked the .58 viewfinder. I would have been happy with it but it was a bit more than I wanted to spend. When the prices on the ZMs dropped, that decided it for me. I got one.

The viewfinder of the ZM is quite nice, particularly if you are a left eyed shooter. It is about as far to the left as it could possibly be due to the location of the film winder on the bottom of the camera. The film loading will be more familiar to SLR users than the Leica's.

I also like the AE lock button. You don't have to keep it pressed - it remembers your settings for 15 seconds or something. I've never had a camera that does this before, and I think it's pretty cool.


Really, I think either one is a great camera. They are also different enough that it should be fairlly easy to choose one based on features.

 

[traveller]

I have been in the same situation and I got me a ZI.

A M6 is cool, I like the feel of the camera and maybe I will get myself a M6 another time. But the ZI has the better VF, especially when you wear glasses, AE can be a nice thing and the AE lock button is really helpful. When I use the camera everything is in the place where it should be and changing film is easier for me when the camera stays in one piece. I don't know if the ZI is really louder than the M6 but surely the sound is more metallic (nothing that a case couldn't take care of if that is important).

The service from Zeiss is very good. When I had a jammed shutter I had the ZI back in 1 1/2 weeks, completely cleaned incl. VF and they excused themselves that it did take so long because of the holidays. BTW, the reason for the jammed shutter was a small straw, maybe blown into the camera when I changed lenses. If they would have played it strictly by the rules I would have had to pay for the repair but I had to pay nothing.

For me it has been they right decision but you can't go wrong with either one.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Cast my vote for the M6 -- just brand loyalty on my part. I can't imagine an improvement on it (MP, maybe) and am comfortable that my Leicas will outlast me. I bought an M6 used in 1994 and it has taken a licking and kept on ticking, thousands of exposures later . . . Less certain about ZI . . . I think that the M6 is the best deal in RF's going.

Ben Marks

 

[thomasw_]

I would go with the ZI in this scenario. I had a M6 and it never became my 'buddy'. As FrankS said, this is merely a subjective evaluation on the M6. It is just wasn't the M3; it didn't feel like an extension of my optical apparatus. I think you need to bear in mind -- and weigh out for yourself -- the comments made previously about the ZI's servicing and durability; it is true that we won't know the full toughness of the ZI until 5 to 10 more years have gone by. But I weigh Ray's experience very highly; he has nothing to gain by you or me choosing a L or Z product, but he is a pro who has used them way more extensively than most members. Based on what Ray has said, I will be in the market for a ZI at some point.

But I think the comparison between the ZI and M6 is misplaced and is somewhat unfair to the M6; shouldn't the comparison be between the ZI and M7? I have AE in mind when I suggest this.

 

[peter_n]

I'm an M7 user who moved to that model from an M6TTL before the ZI came out. I really like my M7s and I'm used to them so I won't be buying a ZI but if they had been around when I was buying I may well have gone down that road. A seriously terrific VF and lighter weight are two of the main advantages, and the reports of a difficult-to-read meter reading in the VF don't mean much to me as I just ofter use AE and bang away. Yes I know I'm a barbarian and I drive automatic cars too. I would seriously consider the ZI.

 

[Never Satisfied]

Cast my vote for the M6, although I'm looking for a user ZI. If I could have just one body and had the 2 to choose from, it would be the M6.

The build quality, which the ZI doesn't come close to and the proven service over 50 plus years, for me would sway me towards the M6.

... but for some of the other reasons, auto, fast film loading, etc, etc, make the ZI a worthy rival. If any body has a user to get rid of, let me know.

Cheers Andrew.

 

[retow]

Cast my vote for the M6, although I'm looking for a user ZI. If I could have just one body and had the 2 to choose from, it would be the M6.

The build quality, which the ZI doesn't come close to and the proven service over 50 plus years, for me would sway me towards the M6.

... but for some of the other reasons, auto, fast film loading, etc, etc, make the ZI a worthy rival. If any body has a user to get rid of, let me know.

Cheers Andrew.

When in comes to ease of use and functionality, the ZI wins over the M6. Interstingly enough the ZI's higher shutter speed is seldom mentioned, but I think it matters - advantage ZI. Build, feel, retention of value - advanatge M6.
However, the best film M camera in terms of functionality is easily the Konica Hexar RF and I'm surprised that it is not more thought after (like new ones for some USD 700 ). Auto, fast film load and, highest shutter speed, viewfinder with all framlines, it has it all, and it feels at least as sturdy as the M6.

 

[mr_phillip]

The issue with questions like this is that, what me be ideal for user X may or may not be ideal for you. For example, I had the same opportunity as jjovin above, but came to the exact opposite conclusion.

One of the things that surprised me was the viewfinders of the cameras: although the Ikon has an instant wow-factor with it's huge bright finder (the Leica's looks decidedly dim in side-by-side comparisons) I found after a while of use that the Leica's finder was actually a better tool for composing pictures. With the Ikon (especially when using 35mm optics) my eye had to scan around the scene to take in the composition, but with the Leica it was just there in front of me.

Another perceived advantage of the Ikon is the film loading, but honestly bottom loading on an M6 is not that much of an issue once you get used to it - I've even managed to change film at a sprint with no issues.

So I guess it comes down to your priorities. If you feel that you absolutely need AE (and only you will know) then it's a no-brainer - get the Ikon. If you need quiteness and solidity above all, then get the M6. Whichever you buy it's sure to be a wonderful camera.

 

[mn4367]

But the Leica FEELS so much better ... :angel:

Sorry for being completely off-topic but how did you came to the funny decision to use Commander of the Order of the British Empire David Gilmour as your avatar and putting Bavaricus(!) under it?