So, why do you like your Zeiss so much more than your Leicas? I honestly haven't been able to find a good "review" on either the ZI or the M7.
I mentioned a couple of reasons in post #53, but in brief:
1> Simply the best viewfinder in the business.
2> One of the best RF, with an EBL comparable to the .85 M6/7 models
3> Easy to see 28mm framelines - I have a hard time seeing the 28mm line on the .72 Leicas (should be easier on the .58 models, but your EBL reduces to 40mm)
4> 1/2000 top speed - nice for shooting wide open in daylight
5> AE without costing an arm and a leg (the price of the M7 is a little silly)
6> Easier film loading
7> I like the design of the camera - the bottom rewind and the lighter weight - but that is a subjective call
I wear contacts most of the time, but also glasses. Is the ZI or M7 useable when I'm wearing glasses?
I wear glasses and I always wear them when I use my ZI - with no problems. I have no experience with the M7.
Originally Posted by AutumnJazz
Everything is analog - even digital :D
The ZI a lot more usable with glasses for the 28mm frameline than the M4-P or the .72 M6 finder. I believe the M7 has the same finder. No experience with the ,58 finder, but it should make the 28 lines easier to use.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Even more offtopic than my thread has gotten, I'm moving on to lenses. Whether I go with the Zeiss or the Leica, I plan on getting the Cosina-Voigt 35/1.2 with them, and the CV 28/2 later on. How do the CV lenses compare to the Leica and Zeiss lenses? Are the M-mount Zeisses the same as their F-mount ones? I ask because I've seen comparasons of the 50mm f/1.4 Zeiss, Nikon, and Sigma...And I must say the Zeiss was the worst, and the sigma was the best.
In real-world situations, who really is good, and who really is good? Ignoring brands, of course. Cosina makes most of the Zeiss and all of the Voigt lenses, correct? How do they compare? And again, are they as bad as the F-mount lenses?
Pretty much all I do is street photography and landscape, if that matters at all. I am trying to get money together for a LF outfit, too. So for me, this rangefinder outfit is going to be for street (and snapshotty pictures). I'm moving away from my F100 so I can have a smaller, quieter, simpler, less obtrusive, lighter, etc. camera. I really am trying to find the right fit in the camera world for me, and I honestly feel a tiny rangefinder and large format setup is best for me, rather than my current attempt at having a do-it-all camera.
I have pretty much settled on the 4x5 + 35mm combo as well. I have a list of gear on my site, if you are interested. Generally I find CV lenses excellent, but the more important point is that in the quick focus (sometimes zone focus) off the cuff handheld available darkness slow shutter speed world of street shooting what matters is a lens that is good enough. Technique is by far the limiting factor here. I seriously doubt anyone could make out a difference between, say the $350 Ultron 28 and the several thousand worth summicron 28, unless the lenses were carfeully focused and shot on a tripod to bring out the absolute best in them.
I honestly figured as much.
Just a question regarding RF focus. Say I want to focus on something that isn't in the center of the frame, do I simply focus on that (AE lock if I need), then recompose? Or will it end up not being in focus with an insanely wide lens like the 35/1.2 or 50/1?
Just focus on it and recompose. Take the AE-L from another point if that's the case.
I don't have an insanely wide 35 or 50 but the Ultron 35/1.7 rarely if ever gets out of focus this way.
As for durability: my ZI has been used and abused in the last two years and still hasn't missed a beat, at this stage I'd say it's a lasting outfit.
Heh, when I said wide I meant fast. Crazy things go through my fingers at 3am. What you said still applies, though. Good.
That turns me off the M7 even more. :|
Last edited by AutumnJazz; 09-27-2008 at 11:50 AM. Click to view previous post history.