Re: Leice R9 System Goes Digital--What A Monstrosity! I can understand people buying and using Bessa bodies. I have a Bessa
that I use occasionally. But I think you have missed my point.
My point is that the Zeiss Ikon is little more than a Bessa with a
different outer casing and a better viewfinder. But it costs twice as
much as a Bessa without being any more robust in use. Whether the
outer casing is plastic or metal is immaterial - in each case, the
film transport and shutter are pure Bessa. So save 50% of the cost of
the Zeiss Ikon and buy a Bessa!
I would happily recommend a Bessa to an light user who took care of
his/her gear, or to a heavy user who took risks and needed to be able
to buy a cheap replacement - such as the skateboard shooters you
mention. The rangefinders need constant adjustment even if the camera
is treated with great care, which I would find intensely annoying. It
is yet another reason for me to avoid a Bessa.
In fact I have five Leica M bodies, two M7s, an M3, a CL and a Minolta
CLE. I tend to use the M7s with 24mm and 35mm lenses mounted, and
carry 15mm (Voigtländer) and 90mm (Leica) lenses in my bag. I
sometimes use the M3 with 50mm (Leica) and 90mm lenses - the 0.92X
viewfinder and accurate frame lines make 90mm shooting a breeze.
The point is that Zeiss did not initiate the project. Nor did Zeiss
drive it. They merely approved it, licensed it, took royalties and
offered two grossly overpriced German-made lenses.
Now the Hasselblad deal has failed, Zeiss, who have not marketed 35mm
cameras and lenses for over 30 years, have been forced to take over
distribution. That's how desperate the situation is.
No, Cosina did all the pushing! Mr Kobayashi of Cosina saw an
opportunity to make Zeiss lenses after Kyocera ended the Contax
licensing deal with Zeiss.
I don't think our views are very far apart. Also, I just bought a
brand new Konica Hexar RF with full warranty. ;-)
The casing is not the issue here. The point is that the film
transport and shutter of the Zeiss Ikon are no better than those in
the Bessas costing half the price. The Bessa mechanical parts do not
remotely approach Leica standards, and the Zeiss Ikon mechanical parts
are identical to these, despite costing twice as much.
On the contrary, a healthy used market strongly encourages people to
trade up to new.
What do you expect? It cost more than twice as much as a Bessa but
the only enhancement was the different paint that was sprayed on to
the body. You could do the same with a can of auto spray paint.
Frankly, I don't see why they should!
Not at all, but the vignetting is significant. I am referring in
particular to tests done by the highly respected Geoffrey Crawley and
published in "Amateur Photographer", but other detailed tests I have
access to (they are unpublished) have shown similar results.
I got out in time. <g> I am delighted that I chose Rollei over
Hasselblad for my medium format outfit.
I don't want them to fail. But we aren't talking about Zeiss, we are
talking about Cosina. Until Hasselblad were removed as distributor,
the Zeiss involvement was very tiny indeed.
Think of it as a franchise. Kyocera bought a Zeiss franchise, made a
lot of money out of it and finally gave it back. Now the franchise
has been sold on, and the new franchisee is Cosina.
I have no love affair with Leica (the company) or even with Leica
bodies. They are well made and mostly reliable, but have some
annoying features as a result of placing a higher priority on
tradition than overall usability.
What I do love is the Leica lenses, and as long as I can buy film and
find a body to use them on, I will be happy. I would just prefer that
the body would be something better than a Bessa. Whether it is called
"Voigtländer" or "Zeiss Ikon" makes no difference. They are all
Bessas.
Tony Polson
|
|
