Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi Bill, Interesting take on the ZI. I would take issue with you on a couple of points. Quality control is not a key factor in longevity, the design is :-) a beautifully made 100% QC item to a poor design will be unreliable and poor performing. I am not saying the ZI is a bad design, simply that its longevity depends on design. This brings me to my second point. Magnesium is rubbish, just cheap and light, it corrodes immediately if not well surface sealed. I am disappointed to see its use beginning to grow in camera shells. Frank On 12 Jan, 2006, at 08:06, Bill Marshall wrote: >> "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