Zeiss Ikon ZM vs Leica M4-2

Thanks for all the food for thought.
I am leaning towards the M4-2 now as it`s battery-free and probably easier to service. Got to say it looks a little cooler than the Ikon as well.
 
I used to use an Ikon, went through all kinds of M, Hexar, CLE and Bessas after it, and bought one back last year. It's an extraordinary tool which just shoot away, which suits my style.

If you wanna shoot and prize speed and ease of use, get it. If you worry about the extra weight a pair of spare LR44 bring or how your tool will be like after a decade of hard use, think otherwise.

In fact it's not all that hard to service since the ZI is quite a simple camera. RF calibration is doable (there's a tutorial somewhere once you google it) and electronics is OK, it's as reliable as a Nikon F3. Not as advanced (which means trouble) like a Hexar RF, it has just the "right" amount of technology. Cosina as a company is doing pretty good and will provide backup for more complicated issues in the forseeable future.

I still keep my M for fun.
 
Archlich said:
I used to use an Ikon, went through all kinds of M, Hexar, CLE and Bessas after it, and bought one back last year. It's an extraordinary tool which just shoot away, which suits my style.

If you wanna shoot and prize speed and ease of use, get it. If you worry about the extra weight a pair of spare LR44 bring or how your tool will be like after a decade of hard use, think otherwise.

In fact it's not all that hard to service since the ZI is quite a simple camera. Not as advanced (which means trouble) like a Hexar RF, it has just the "right" amount of technology. RF calibration is doable (there's a tutorial somewhere once you google it) and electronics is OK, it's as reliable as a Nikon F3. Cosina as a company is doing pretty good and will provide backup for more complicated issues in the forseeable future.

I still keep my M for fun.
Click to expand...

Agree. Like I said before, my Bessa R2 is dong quite well and is pretty damxn reliable. I even bought it second hand. Its not like they fail at the drop of a hat or anything.

By the way, anyone got a link to a Bessa R2 CLA? Would be nice to have some info about them.

Regards.

Marcelo
 
I would go for the M4-2. Leica still makes parts for it.

The comparison of the ZM with the Nikon F3 is unfortunate, but true. My F3 could use a new meter display LCD, but that comes on a circuit board that Nikon no longer makes or carries as spare parts. The all mechanical F2 and F make better long term bets.

Same issue with the M4-2 vs the ZM. When the parts go, there won't be any further service on the ZM.
 
Not an M4-2 owner, but had the M4 and the ZM at the same time for 6 months. The ZM was supposed to replace both my Contax G system and my M4, but after giving it what I'd call more than a fair trial, I kept the M4 and the Contax G.

The viewfinder of the ZM is not all that it's cracked up to be. It's big and it's clear, which is great, but it's not as user friendly and steady as the M viewfinder...but if you shoot 28s, then the ZM is a no brainer.
 
BLKRCAT said:
ZM all the way. Its not a fair comparison to the m4-2. Better finder, built in meter (and one that is actually quite good), auto exposure, better baselength.

The only leg the leica has on the Zeiss is build quality. But don't get confused, it's still very good.
Click to expand...

like BLKRCAT is saying. the ZM is a fine machine and the view... oh what a view.
 
If you can do without AE, The M6 is the best of both worlds IMO. Perhaps a bit higher cost, depending. I was lucky and got a 0.85x model for only $800. Hooray for estate sales.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom