glenerrolrd Posted February 27, 2007 Share #21  Posted February 27, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Roger, Did you not feel that compared to the lenses which seem very good value, the price of the finder was "ouch" expensive. Mind you compared to the £199 I have just paid for the 1.25x magnifier, almost anything would seem good value!  Wilson Wilson Expensive yes but not compared to my investment in Leica glass. I think I was able to find the Leica 24MM for about $1700 ..add another $200 to get it 6 bit coded and certified . The Zeiss finder I got for about $350. This is one I really want to get right as the 24mm is a really great FOV(32mm) for walking around . I am not sure which finder will be best . The Leica 28mm (plastic version) has a lower magnification and room around the frame . Also shows some distortion..but its fast . The zeiss covers both 25 and 28 ..it is exceptionally bright , has a higher magnification than the Leica and seems like a perfect flat view. So I have to work with the new combination so more before deciding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted February 27, 2007 Share #22 Â Posted February 27, 2007 Wilson Expensive yes but not compared to my investment in Leica glass. I think I was able to find the Leica 24MM for about $1700 ..add another $200 to get it 6 bit coded and certified . The Zeiss finder I got for about $350. This is one I really want to get right as the 24mm is a really great FOV(32mm) for walking around . I am not sure which finder will be best . The Leica 28mm (plastic version) has a lower magnification and room around the frame . Also shows some distortion..but its fast . The zeiss covers both 25 and 28 ..it is exceptionally bright , has a higher magnification than the Leica and seems like a perfect flat view. So I have to work with the new combination so more before deciding. Â Roger, Â I don't know if they have changed the design since I had a viewer for the 21mm Biogon G for my G2. Lovely bright viewer as you say but the foot was quite thin. It was easily brushed off the camera's accessory shoe. In the end I put two layers of Scotch Invisible Magic tape over the foot to make it stiffer in the shoe. Â It was not so much the overall price of the CZ viewer I was commenting on, as the pricing set against the CZ ZM lenses, which seem extraordinary value. I think they might sell even better if they improved the finish quite a bit and charged a fraction more for them. I think the market would bear that. One is not buying them as a "six month user" Â Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted February 27, 2007 Share #23 Â Posted February 27, 2007 I understand that the finish and quality are already outstanding. They could start including the hood though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted February 27, 2007 Share #24 Â Posted February 27, 2007 I understand that the finish and quality are already outstanding. They could start including the hood though. Â Carsten, Â I have the 21 and 35 ZM Biogons. Whereas I am absolutely 100% delighted with the optical performance, the finish is not bad but it is not up to Leica standards or to the older Zeiss lenses made by Zeiss themselves and Kyocera. The G series were particularly nicely finished. The paint has a slightly cheap look to it and I am told by people on the Contax forum that it does not wear terribly well, brassing quite early on. Â I would agree about the hoods, which are the best finished pieces of the lens. Who is going to buy a lens without a hood, even if it does fit more than one lens. You would have to be a serious cheapskate to move hoods backwards and forwards as you changed lenses, just to save $80 a pop. Â Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.