Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Bill, In retrospect, I probably was too harsh on the Zeiss-Ikon. I think that the name Zeiss-Ikon led me to expect that it would feel heavier, like the brass-bodied cameras of yesteryear (and like a modern day MP, which is like a brick). I thought it was closer to a Contax G2 (and not an unpleasant weight). I think that its initial impression on me as being like a smaller M5 left me feeling like it should be heavier. But I agree with you on the construction materials. I killed a Nikon SLR in 1980 by dropping it on the concrete from 3 feet up. I did the same to a Contax Aria, and it just sort of bounced. Still works. Do you agree with me on the shutter noise (i.e., closer to a Leica than a Bessa)? Jeffery Smith New Orleans, LA http://www.400tx.com -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+jsmith342=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Bill Marshall Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 2:07 AM To: lug@leica-users.org Subject: Was RE: [Leica] DSLR choice - now Zeiss-Ikon >"It doesn't have the heft of a Leica M6, and the metal seems less >substantial . . ." Jeffrey, my Zeiss Ikon is built as robustly as my Nikon FM3a & to a much higher standard than the Bessa R2 I sold. Zeiss quality control standards are very high & insure that this camera will last a long time. It's every bit as durable IMO as the Nikon FM series cameras have proven to be. In my view, it fits the same niche in relation to a Leica M camera as these FM cameras filled in relation to Nikon's professional F series cameras. It's a mistake IMO to judge build quality by "heft" & weight. The M6, for example, is only 3 1/2 ounces heavier than a ZI. Not all that much heavier. And where does the weight come from? Mostly from the brass & sinc in the bottom, top, & front plates. Zeiss chose magnesium, only available in modern alloys for such manufacturing in recent years. Without the weight of brass & zinc, magnesium provides a lighter alternative with excellent strength-to-weight ratio - among the best in the industry - & the elasticity to be equally excellent at absorbing shock. Why choose the extra weight & expense of brass & zinc when it's not necessary to meet the need? However the real structural integrity comes not from this external cladding, but from the internal body frame. Here both cameras are the same - die-cast aluminum. The superior Leica build quality is in the small details, not in the oft-sited "heft," which is simply left over from a time when heavy metals were the only choice. In regard to the small details even a modern Leica can probably not match the build quality of an M3. Unfortunately, much of the manufacturing cost of a Leica is due to hand assembly & a failure to convert to more modern production methods, including the use of robotics. Nonetheless, a Leica M camera is built to a standard for the most demanding professional use - again like a Nikon F2 or F3. A Zeiss Ikon is built to a standard for the most demanding use of an advance amateur - like a Nikon FM2 - & like the FM2, will in some cases & under certain circumstances be an excellent alternative or back-up for pro use. Bill _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information