New Nikon F6 VS. New Zeiss Ikon ZM (w/Zeiss 50mm f/2 Planar) - Which to purchase?

[Craig]

Same goes for Cosina "Voigtlander" Bessa which is as flimsy as a camera can be and yet still dictates ridiculous prices (compared to its build quality) just because it's a rangefinder with screw mount or Leica mount.

Agree, it's priced as a Leica alternative, not on it's own merits. Seems grossly overpriced when a Nikon F4 is $200.

 

[BMbikerider]

The F6 is the toughest professional film camera Nikon ever built. I'm sure the Zeiss Ikon is a fun camera, but all I'm saying is that its price on the used market reflects spill over from Leica pricing, not its build quality—which, on the inside, is no better than the Nikon FE10 that you can buy for less than $100.

"The F6 is the toughest professional film camera Nikon ever built since the F2 & F4 I'm sure the Zeiss Ikon is a fun camera, but all I'm saying is that its price on the used market reflects spill over from Leica pricing, not its build quality—which, on the inside, is no better than the Nikon FE10 that you can buy for less than $100."

Sure the F6 is/was a fine camera! I used to own one but I had more exposure fluctuations and inaccuracies' with it than I do on my F2a. I sold it at a 100% profit. Bought for £650 sold for £1300. It is very well built but I found the matrix metering not the be all and end all that it was cracked up to be.

 

[warden]

Same goes for Cosina "Voigtlander" Bessa which is as flimsy as a camera can be and yet still dictates ridiculous prices (compared to its build quality) just because it's a rangefinder with screw mount or Leica mount.

Don't think the OP is considering a Bessa but I wouldn't argue with somebody that chooses an inexpensive rangefinder to hold their expensive glass, which sounds smart to me if money is tight. I just looked at selling prices of Bessas on Ebay (US) and they're commanding a big spread of prices, likely because of the lenses they accept and the style. On the lower end though they're going for an average of $475 without a lens for new looking bodies. (That's an average price of 12 sold listings.) Is that a ridiculous price? I don't know. On the high end they're closer to $1K which seems high to me but whatever. There is no need for anyone willing to do a little research to pay that much, but people do.

I've never held a Bessa btw so what do I know - maybe they fall apart in your hands when you wind them?

 

[M-88]

Don't think the OP is considering a Bessa but I wouldn't argue with somebody that chooses an inexpensive rangefinder to hold their expensive glass, which sounds smart to me if money is tight. I just looked at selling prices of Bessas on Ebay (US) and they're commanding a big spread of prices, likely because of the lenses they accept and the style. On the lower end though they're going for an average of $475 without a lens for new looking bodies. (That's an average price of 12 sold listings.) Is that a ridiculous price? I don't know. On the high end they're closer to $1K which seems high to me but whatever. There is no need for anyone willing to do a little research to pay that much, but people do.

I've never held a Bessa btw so what do I know - maybe they fall apart in your hands when you wind them?

When Canon T60, Olympus OM2000, Nikon FM10, Ricoh KR-5 and whatever else there is that shares a Cosina CT1 chassis, is sold for 100-150$ max. and Bessa is sold for three times as much, yet it has the same plasticky feel, same internal mechanism, even the same shutter dial, advance lever and shutter button, all of which feel crappy ... it just doesn't seem right.

 

[mshchem]

Same goes for Cosina "Voigtlander" Bessa which is as flimsy as a camera can be and yet still dictates ridiculous prices (compared to its build quality) just because it's a rangefinder with screw mount or Leica mount.

The cameras are fine for what they are. Not an all metal beast, very decent cameras if well preserved. Cosina makes, today, beautiful brass and alloy lenses. Leica lenses are very expensive. Even used expect to pay 3 or 4 times what a nice new Voigtlander M mount lens costs. The now older Zeiss ZM lenses made by Cosina are very affordable and absolutely beautiful lenses.

 

[Craig]

On the lower end though they're going for an average of $475 without a lens for new looking bodies. (That's an average price of 12 sold listings.) Is that a ridiculous price?

Many of the cheaper Bessa's do not have a rangefinder, they rely on an accessory auxiliary finder, so there is no way to focus other than guessing the distance to subject. Great for the wide angles, but not for anything else.

Within the rangefinders, the cheaper ones are screw mount, which limits the lens choice. The M mount cameras can use screw lenses with an adapter, but not the other way around.

 

[warden]

Many of the cheaper Bessa's do not have a rangefinder, they rely on an accessory auxiliary finder, so there is no way to focus other than guessing the distance to subject.

Yes I noticed that so I omitted the non-rangefinder models from my analysis. These were all bessa – R.

Zeiss made a version of the no rangefinder model as well and I was really tempted to get one back in the day just for wide angle use but never got one.

 

[Craig]

There are plenty of flavours of the Bessa bodies, it can be a bit of a minefield!

 

[brbo]

Many of the cheaper Bessa's do not have a rangefinder...

"Many" is quite a strong word for one Bessa camera that doesn't have a rangefinder (Bessa L). Bessa T has a rangefinder but doesn't have a viewfinder. All other Voigländer Bessa cameras (R, R2, R2M, R2A, R3M, R3A, R4M, R4A, R2S, R2C) have rangefinders and viewfinders.

 

[cliveh]

A Zeiss 50mm f/2 Planar is the dogs bollocks of lenses.

 

[markjwyatt]

"Many" is quite a strong word for one Bessa camera that doesn't have a rangefinder (Bessa L). Bessa T has a rangefinder but doesn't have a viewfinder. All other Voigländer Bessa cameras (R, R2, R2M, R2A, R3M, R3A, R4M, R4A, R2S, R2C) have rangefinders and viewfinders.

And the Zeiss ZM was designed by Zeiss Ikon. I think that is the key difference. I am open to the other Bessas made by Cosina.

 

[BMbikerider]

I've never understood the lovefest for the F2, unless it simply represents the age of some of the members here, and it was "the" camera to have when they were young. I personally can't see a single reason to buy one over an F3 if I wanted a "classsic" styled SLR. Parts and service are getting increasingly difficult to find for F2s and they are all at an age where they need servicing. It was a major design goal of the F3 to make the shutter more reliable and with fewer parts than the F2, and they succeed - the F3's shutter has half the parts of a F2.

And when the electronics used for the shutter go belly up you are stuffed. No spares see! With the F2 they can almost always can be repaired, calibrated and away we go. Parts may be a bit scarce for the f2 but they are even making the metering electronics for the DP11 finder for the F2a (In UK). But nothing for the F3.

 

[mshchem]

And the Zeiss ZM was designed by Zeiss Ikon. I think that is the key difference. I am open to the other Bessas made by Cosina.

The Zeiss Ikon name was purchased/licensed by Cosina I don't think Zeiss had any involvement in the camera.

 

[Pioneer]

The Zeiss Ikon name was purchased/licensed by Cosina I don't think Zeiss had any involvement in the camera.

That is quite interesting since I know for a fact that Zeiss is still handling the service and repairs. I'm not sure how long that will continue since the camera is now discontinued; this will eventually become a problem. I use and enjoy Leica cameras as well but my regular rangefinder user is a ZI. To me it is just an excellent and extremely usable camera. I do send it in occasionally to have the rangefinder cleaned and adjusted. Eventually I guess I should learn how to adjust it myself but I haven't had to do that yet.

Interestingly my Leica cameras seem to require regular service as well but I continue to use them and don't consider the need for occasional service to be a problem. Regular service is kind of a fact of life with most mechanical cameras I am aware of.

BTW, I feel that Cosina Voigtlander is a really good manufacturer as well so I can't say that Zeiss did a bad thing in choosing them to manufacture their camera. The Bessa cameras are pretty good in their own right and are quite reasonably priced. I may be mistaken but it doesn't seem to me that spending huge amounts of money on equipment is necessary in order to get good photographs, or good service.

It certainly doesn't always work out that way but if you take care of things they will usually take care of you. The only camera I have ever owned for a long time and used regularly, for literally thousands of rolls of film, that seemed to just keep working well without any service has been my Pentax K1000. But I don't believe that is normal for most mechanical cameras. I bought mine in the late 70s and it has been serviced once in all that time while still giving good service. However I don't consider that to be normal though.

 

[warden]

The Zeiss Ikon name was purchased/licensed by Cosina I don't think Zeiss had any involvement in the camera.

My understanding is that Zeiss collaborated with Henssler and Schultheiss and Cosina to design and develop the camera. Do you have a source for Cosina’s ownership/licensing of the Zeiss Ikon name? That doesn’t sound right. I would have expected Cosina to simply be a contract manufacturer for Zeiss but if you have a source claiming otherwise I’d be interested in reading about it.

Zeiss Ikon Analogkamera — Henssler und Schultheiss Design

Wiederbelebung der Traditionsmarke Zeiss Ikon

www.henssler-schultheiss.de

 

[mshchem]

My understanding is that Zeiss collaborated with Henssler and Schultheiss and Cosina to design and develop the camera. Do you have a source for Cosina’s ownership/licensing of the Zeiss Ikon name? That doesn’t sound right. I would have expected Cosina to simply be a contract manufacturer for Zeiss but if you have a source claiming otherwise I’d be interested in reading about it.

Zeiss Ikon Analogkamera — Henssler und Schultheiss Design

Wiederbelebung der Traditionsmarke Zeiss Ikon

www.henssler-schultheiss.de

2004 Announced the manufacture and sale of jointly developed products with Carl Zeiss of Germany..

Cosina's website has a lot of the history.

事業概要・事業所 - 株式会社コシナ

cosina - description

www.cosina.co.jp

 

[manfrominternet]

I have to say that the autofocus on my Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-7 is the problem. I always find myself turning off the autofocus and focusing manually on my Minolta. The particular issue with my Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-7 is that it doesn't have split-image rangefinder focusing screen (native or attachment), so critical focusing can be iffy much of the time, but still far better than letting the Minolta do the focusing for you.

I guess with that said, I should really be asking for a recomendation for a 35mm film camera that has an outstanding 100% viewfinder with the option to install a split-image rangefinder focusing screen. (I also wonder if I might fix everything by simplying buying and installing a viewfinder eye adjustment. The one native to my camera focuses in at -2.0 max, but what I really need is a -4.0 max.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have to say that the autofocus on my Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-7 is the problem. I always find myself turning off the autofocus and focusing manually on my Minolta. The particular issue with my Minolta Maxxum/Dynax/a-7 is that it doesn't have split-image rangefinder focusing screen (native or attachment), so critical focusing can be iffy much of the time, but still far better than letting the Minolta do the focusing for you.

I guess with that said, I should really be asking for a recomendation for a 35mm film camera that has an outstanding 100% viewfinder with the option to install a split-image rangefinder focusing screen. (I also wonder if I might fix everything by simplying buying and installing a viewfinder eye adjustment. The one native to my camera focuses in at -2.0 max, but what I really need is a -4.0 max.

A CLA would fix the focusing problem and save you from searching for another camera. Jes' sayin'

 

[Arthurwg]

+1



For OP and medium format, if you're really seriously going to sell large prints doing landscape, that Mamiya 6 is hands down the one that will make the best negative. I don't know the fuji, though I am certain that would be a winner, too. I like Fuji lenses.

You have to really think before going there, though. The Mamiya 6 only has 50mm as the shortest focal length.

Among other things, that would require a jump from rectangle to square. If you are not into square you might be interested in the 6x7 Mamiya 7, which also has a spectacular 45mm lens. One of the bast cameras ever made IMHO.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Among other things, that would require a jump from rectangle to square. If you are not into square you might be interested in the 6x7 Mamiya 7, which also has a spectacular 45mm lens. One of the bast cameras ever made IMHO.

Nothing wrong with square. In fact for years Hasselblad advertized "Square is the perfect format."

 

[Mike Lopez]

Among other things, that would require a jump from rectangle to square. If you are not into square you might be interested in the 6x7 Mamiya 7, which also has a spectacular 45mm lens. One of the bast cameras ever made IMHO.

Minor correction: it's a 43mm lens, not a 45mm. It's an odd focal length. And combined with the fact that there's a 50mm available as well, it's a bit of a head-scratcher.

But I agree with the rest of your post, having owned a Mamiya 7II in the past. The lenses for that camera might just be the best ever made.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Minor correction: it's a 43mm lens, not a 45mm. It's an odd focal length. And combined with the fact that there's a 50mm available as well, it's a bit of a head-scratcher.

But I agree with the rest of your post, having owned a Mamiya 7II in the past. The lenses for that camera might just be the best ever made.

Some people rather use a 43mm or 45mm lens than have to go to all the work of stepping back a little when using a 50mm lens.

 

[Arthurwg]

Yes, 43mm. I should have remembered that as I own one.

 

[chuckroast]

Years ago, I had all my Hasselblad stuff stolen while traveling. I had another trip scheduled right after that, so I rented the Mamiya 7 with several lenses. It's a terrific system and the 43mm is a really wonderful lens - tack sharp, wonderful wide field of view. I shot a number of really nice images in an old abandoned mining time with that system and they printed without issue at 16x20.

Mercifully, my HB stuff was insured and replaced, but I was briefly tempted to switch to the Mamiya system instead. To this day, I sometimes wonder if I made the right decision given the weight of lugging an HB with 6 lenses around ...

 

[Sirius Glass]

Years ago, I had all my Hasselblad stuff stolen while traveling. I had another trip scheduled right after that, so I rented the Mamiya 7 with several lenses. It's a terrific system and the 43mm is a really wonderful lens - tack sharp, wonderful wide field of view. I shot a number of really nice images in an old abandoned mining time with that system and they printed without issue at 16x20.

Mercifully, my HB stuff was insured and replaced, but I was briefly tempted to switch to the Mamiya system instead. To this day, I sometimes wonder if I made the right decision given the weight of lugging an HB with 6 lenses around ...

I am sorry to here about the Hasselblad theft. One needs to arrange the equipment to take out of the car, so that one leave the car with the camera equipment one wants and is not fiddling with the door or trunk open going though the camera bag for all to see. You know this, but other readers in the future will see this and hopefully learn.