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.
My situation was different. There was an organized gang of thieves operating that caused a distraction so they could reach into the car and grab the bag I did have out --- which happened to be the HB bag.
I had replacement insurance on everything. I told the agent that I'd bought most of the stuff used and would be happy to find like-for-like used equipment again, he said, "Nope, you paid to replace and we replace only with new stuff." So ... I got an entirely new HB kit, 3 backs, and 4 lenses.
My situation was different. There was an organized gang of thieves operating that caused a distraction so they could reach into the car and grab the bag I did have out --- which happened to be the HB bag.
I had replacement insurance on everything. I told the agent that I'd bought most of the stuff used and would be happy to find like-for-like used equipment again, he said, "Nope, you paid to replace and we replace only with new stuff." So ... I got an entirely new HB kit, 3 backs, and 4 lenses.
How does that work with film gear that you can’t buy new? What would they replace my Rolleiflex with?
Assuming that the item was covered by a protected condition in the insurance coverage, they would find a dollar equivalent. At least that's what they did for me. They didn't actually buy the equipment. They came up with a number that was cost to replace plus tax.
However, they didn't just hand me a cheque. Because insurance fraud is so rampant, they wrote the check to my preferred photographic supplier and I bought against the amount there. At some point, after I'd purchased a fair bit of equipment, the vendor wrote me a check for the largish balance.
My situation was different. There was an organized gang of thieves operating that caused a distraction so they could reach into the car and grab the bag I did have out --- which happened to be the HB bag.
I had replacement insurance on everything. I told the agent that I'd bought most of the stuff used and would be happy to find like-for-like used equipment again, he said, "Nope, you paid to replace and we replace only with new stuff." So ... I got an entirely new HB kit, 3 backs, and 4 lenses.
I guess what I'm really asking is if the value of an $1800 Zeiss Ikon ZM set outweighs that of a Nikon F6. Does the rangefinder experience/lens ecosystem really produce sharper images than that of, say, a Nikon F6?
I doubt it, unless we're talking slow hand holding. They both have superb lenses in their ecosystem that would produce negatives impossible to tell apart from one another.Does the rangefinder experience/lens ecosystem really produce sharper images than that of, say, a Nikon F6?
At that price (assuming you can fix the problem with the rangefinder yourself) you could use the ZM for a year and sell it without losing any money. It's close to a free rental.Just a quick update - The seller is willing to sell me the whole Zeiss Ikon ZM set - all of which is immaculate and includes all original boxes and paperwork - for $1800 flat. Besides the Zeiss Ikon ZM body, this includes the Zeiss 50mm f/2 Planar ZM, Zeiss 50mm lens hood, Zeiss Ikon ZM hand grip, Gariz strap, and Mr. Zhou leather case.
...
I'm wondering whether the features of the Nikon F6, being an SLR, outweighs those of a rangefinder system like the Zeiss Ikon ZM or Minolta CLE...
I guess what I'm really asking is if the value of an $1800 Zeiss Ikon ZM set outweighs that of a Nikon F6. Does the rangefinder experience/lens ecosystem really produce sharper images than that of, say, a Nikon F6?
In my hands it looks like the ZM really produces sharper images, than say F100 (I do not have F6). But I use it for different projects, than the AF SLRs. Not fair comparation, because the F100 works under different cirucumstances (low light, fast actions). My negatives from ZM are really better, but I think my approach to way how I use my cameras is what makes the difference.Does the rangefinder experience/lens ecosystem really produce sharper images than that of, say, a Nikon F6?
In my hands it looks like the ZM really produces sharper images, than say F100 (I do not have F6). But I use it for different projects, than the AF SLRs. Not fair comparation, because the F100 works under different cirucumstances (low light, fast actions). My negatives from ZM are really better, but I think my approach to way how I use my cameras is what makes the difference.
It's all a matter of aste but, I can't stand rangefinders. I want a viewfinder that sees exactly what thelens sees, meaning SLR all the way!
I'm always worried about theves theving off with any of my numerous cameras. I really should get one of those RFID chips sewn into all my camera bags.
......
Any further thoughts on the Nikon F6 vs. Zeiss Ikon ZM?
Just a quick update - The seller is willing to sell me the whole Zeiss Ikon ZM set - all of which is immaculate and includes all original boxes and paperwork - for $1800 flat. Besides the Zeiss Ikon ZM body, this includes the Zeiss 50mm f/2 Planar ZM, Zeiss 50mm lens hood, Zeiss Ikon ZM hand grip, Gariz strap, and Mr. Zhou leather case.
I'm wondering whether the features of the Nikon F6, being an SLR, outweighs those of a rangefinder system like the Zeiss Ikon ZM or Minolta CLE...
I guess what I'm really asking is if the value of an $1800 Zeiss Ikon ZM set outweighs that of a Nikon F6. Does the rangefinder experience/lens ecosystem really produce sharper images than that of, say, a Nikon F6?
I too have (older) Sony A7 and use manual lenses with it: Contax CY series of primes, mostly used with 85/1.4. Other lenses are M mount, mix of ZM and Voigtlander lenses. Unfortunately no Leica lenses anymore, they were stolen. Both series are very good for what i expect in the digital world. I have got adapters infinity corrected, so I can use the M mount lenses prefocused, which is same as I do with ZM.That's what I'm wondering about. Maximum resolution with incredibly good lenses and the ability attach said lenses to my Sony a7R IV are of great importance to me. (I should have mentioned this last point about attaching lenses to my Sony a7R IV.)
...
How do you shoot your Ikon ZM that gives you sharper negatives than your F100?
I will add that for wide angle lenses, rangefinders have a significant advantage over SLRs (e.g., they do not require retrofocus lenses as an SLR with the additional distance to accommodate a mirror assembly). Not sure if this is important to you.
My favorite lens on my Contax rangefinder is the Voigtlander [Cosina] 21mm f4. It is a great lens, and so compact (it is similar to the Zeiss Biogpn f4.5). Some 20/21mm SLR lenses are really big, though some modern ones are more compact, but not as compact as the Voigtlander.
I have and love a GA645Zi with the aforementioned cabling problem. It's easy enough to work around. You may have to memorize the sequence of ASA settings if the display is wonky, but you can usually figure that out. After that, you can see f/stop and speed in the viewfinder. The only thing that can be maddening is knowing what frame you are on if the display doesn't light up all the segments.
The biggest upsides of this camera is it's portability and optics (which are just terrific). The biggest downsides are the relatively slow lens and that it's really clumsy to use in manual mode since it's kind of all fly by wire - no mechanical adjustments. That said, I've taken mine all over the US, parts of Europe and parts of Asia as my travel camera and it has delivered terrific images. It's also worth mentioning that focus can be adjusted manually if you prefer (which I do) but it's done in discrete steps not continuously like a normal mechanical focusing system.
But even 645 is s little small for my tastes so I now carry a Fuji GW690II 6x9 format camera as my travel snapshooter. The images are ridiculously good. For example here is a scan of a silver print I made from one of those 6x9 negs. The print is sharper than what you see here because scanning and downsampling for posting erodes some of the image quality, but ...
I actually also have a Fuji GW690III (along with a Fuji GF670) and I readily admit that the optics are absolutely fantastic with both! The only issue is that both are fixed lenses. I typically carry around both Fuji cameras in a bag and thats pushing it a bit in the weight department a bit.
I suspect that the GA645ZI (or GS645) would be a lot better to carry around in my bag with my GF670 than the GW690III. But there you have it - even the weight of the GF670 + GW690III is too much for me to bear.
That's why I worry if the camera - say Nikon F6 - is too heavy.
If a Nikon F6 + a Nikon 28mm/35mm/50mm/and 85mm combo is too heavy bordering on medium format, I really do wonder if the Zeiss Ikon ZM equivalent might be better after all?
Me too, mostly with an AF-D 24mm.I use AF SLRS as super big fast Point and Shoot.
One of his other criteria was handholdability in low light. One of the criteria was advanced metering, and no Graphic has a meter, let alone an advanced one. That is why I am suggesting a Canon SLR with one of the IS stabilized lenses.In my mind, there is at least one other option to consider. One that I have owned in the past, own now, and have shot a ton of stuff on: A "Baby" 2x3 Graphic in any of its incarnations (Speed, Century, etc.)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?