Zeiss Ikon=R2A

roundg said:
I never suspect new ZI is not designed in Gemany by Zeiss. I also never suspect Zeiss try their best. What I suspect is how much capacity Ziess still left in their camera design team. The last real RF they designed is the contax IIa/IIIa, 45 years ago. And obvious Zeiss can't afford a new production line in Germany. So they have to consider how to make use of the current one in Cosina.

No compromise, but it depends on how far their stength could stretch.
Click to expand...

I think that buying a Leica because one wants a Leica is a perfectly valid choice. The M is a great product which has been used by many of the photographers represented in books on my shelf which is pretty cool. No other rangefinder camera is going to provide the history of a Leica. :cool:

What I don't see is the need to suggest that the reason for buying a Leica is due to perceived shortcomings in other cameras/companies. The essentials of a camera body could be produced just about any optics company in the world today. If Cosina wanted to target a $3000 price point instead of well under $1000, I doubt they would have used an existing chassis. In terms of Zeiss' design capabilities, by all accounts the viewfinder & rangefinder of the ZI are excellent. :D
 
5nap5hot said:
How different is the the Zeiss Ikon in comparison to the R2A. From what I have been able to see on the net, the Zeiss looks ALOT like the Bessa. They share parts and are made by the same company.

What makes it so much more expensive than the R2A? The little Zeiss sticker? The fixed strap lugs? :p
Click to expand...


It is interesting (to me) to read how the ZI was attacked when it first came out. Putts' articles helped a bit.

This blog is a sticky for this forum. I think it addresses the first post in this thread
http://elekm.net/zeiss_ikon/pages/intro.html

This blog has mp3s of the ZI and other camera shutter sounds.

The blog also has an obscure but detailed article "Inside The Zeiss Ikon".
http://elekm.net/zeiss_ikon/pages/comments_other_bm.html

This is a worthwhile read if you want to understand the differences and similarities between the ZI and the Bessas.

I think Hicks and Schlutz summed up the ZI best in their Shutterbug review last April. The ZI is priced in between the R2A and the M7. You get what you pay for. The ZI is not a Leica, neither is it a Bessa.



Last spring I showed my ZI to the Leica guru at a nearby camera store. When he handed it back to me all he said was. "The finder is remarkable. Thanks for showing it to me."

At another excellent camera store I showed the ZI to their one of the salesman. It was a slow night. The store manager was nearby. The salesman gave the ZI to the manager and said,
" You should take a look at this." When the manager handled the camera and gave it back to me he said. "Now that is a real camera you've got there... that's a real camera."
This was from someone who makes their living doing a brisk business in Canon, Pentax, Olympus and Nikon DSLRs and top-of-the-line P&S cameras.


willie
 
Well... I am glad I started this thread. It has really sold me on the Zeiss Ikon.
Now the next question, Zeiss Vs Leica Glass. My instructor at the photo school I go to told me that German lens have superior glass due to the sand qualities in some regions of Germany.(not strictly because of German manufacture) I know that Zeiss lens are made in Japan, are they made with Japanese glass raw material?
Leica lenses are REALLY expensive. (at least the new ones are). Is it a better value to go with used Leica glass or new Zeiss?
 
5nap5hot said:
Well... I am glad I started this thread. It has really sold me on the Zeiss Ikon.
Now the next question, Zeiss Vs Leica Glass. My instructor at the photo school I go to told me that German lens have superior glass due to the sand qualities in some regions of Germany.(not strictly because of German manufacture) I know that Zeiss lens are made in Japan, are they made with Japanese glass raw material?
Leica lenses are REALLY expensive. (at least the new ones are). Is it a better value to go with used Leica glass or new Zeiss?
Click to expand...

Leica lenses have a different look than the Zeiss lenses... Better is not a useful term at this point. Both are excellent as new lines. Decide which look you like best, which range offers the focal length and speed you require, then decide which price point you can negotiate.

FWIW - either can use LTM (with basic very good adapters) or used M mount lenses - you are not restricted to the newest offerings by either manufacturer.
 
The measurement criteria among many photographers today isn't how sharp a lens is but how it renders out-of-focus regions. And that often is what gives a particular "look" to certain lenses.

Leica and Zeiss lenses today should give you plenty of sharpness, so it comes down to which "look" you prefer. For that, look at the many photos that have been posted to the Internet.

I've read a number of stories -- which might or might not be true -- about production of the glass for German lenses. Years ago, air bubbles in glass was considered a sign of quality. Today, you never see bubbles in glass, which leads me to think that a negative (inability to remove the air bubbles) was turned into a positive.

So I probably wouldn't listen too closely to those stories. Maybe they're true. Maybe they're not.

If you want to learn more about the Zeiss lens designs, visit this page.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom