Jump to content

Zeiss finders on the M9

richard_man

By richard_man
in Customer Forum

Recommended Posts

richard_man

richard_man

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I used to highly recommend Zeiss viewfinders. They are incredibly bright. I also have a few Zeiss ZM lens such as the Sonnar 85/2 ZM and the 25/2.8. Of course I love their 30 year SWC Biogon lens. I also owned the 21/2.8 ZM before.

 

However, I can no longer recommend Zeiss products. Why? Take a look at the following photos. The first one is just hand held using the Zeiss 15mm Viewfinder lining up the horizontal framelines with the lines on the wall etc. It’s very loosely done and I am not directly parallel to the wall so there’s a slight tilt and distortion, not a problem.

 

The second one is taken with the 25/28mm Zeiss Viewfinder with the camera on the tripod and I lining up the framelines as careful as possible. See the problem?

 

Yes, the framelines are tilted. This does not happen on the 15mm VF, or the 21mm and 25mm VF I once owned. I understand things can get out of alignment, especially since this is a used item. I am prepared to have it fixed if the price is right. So I emailed Zeiss support, having done business with them previously when they adjusted my Sonnar 85/2 ZM.

 

The conversation (I have to respect their “confidentiality” and not posting the actual email) basically went like this:

 

(Zeiss Person): there is nothing wrong with the viewfinder. Zeiss does not recommend using the finder on non-Zeiss cameras (oh yea, like there are zillions of Zeiss Ikon being used compared to the Leica M? Dream ON). You have to adjust for it.

 

Me: but the other viewfinders work fine!

 

ZP: you can send it to us for inspection, I can tell WITH CERTAINTY that there is nothing wrong with the viewfinder.

 

****

 

With certainty? Without looking at it, and with all the other Zeiss finders working just fine on the same camera? Really? Wow. And this would be the last time I purchase a Zeiss viewfinder. You be the judge of the photo evidence. I will rather spend $150 and get a Voigtlander Cosina finder than dealing with such arrogance. So much for the legendary Zeiss quality.

 

http://www.richardmanphoto.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/1-20120414-L1010065.jpg

 

 

 

http://www.richardmanphoto.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2-20120412-L1010049.jpg

 

(blog at Zeiss Customer “Support” )

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites
MarkP

MarkP

Posted
Posted

I and others have previously posted about problems with rotational errors with the Zeiss 21mm finder on Leica bodies.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/219283-viewfinder-21mm-lens-2.html#post1952170 Post #31

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...omparison.htm Post #2 etc

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...ica-zeiss.html Post #9 etc.

 

Interestingly Zeiss admit as much, stating they are designed for the Ikon which has a different hotshoe offset to the lens central axis than the Leicas.

 

However this looks really bad, more than any rotational error I would have expected.

I think the finder is stuffed. Send it back.

 

Interestingly, my interaction with Zeiss (correspondence with, and then sending my 1.5/50 Sonnar in for adjustment for digital) was a very positive experience.

Link to post
Share on other sites
richard_man

richard_man

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I had really positive experience with them too on prior need to have my 85/2 Sonnar adjusted. I can accept slight rotational due to physics of the hotshoe offset. I can accept that I have bad luck and purchased a used item that might have gotten bumped around and need to have something adjusted. I cannot accept the sheer arrogance of someone purporting to be providing customer support.

 

Just purchased a CV25mm from a reputed dealer that I have purchased stuff from many times. If this one is somehow defective, I'm sure they will take it back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
richard_man

richard_man

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Are you sure that it's not user error - remember with a 21mm lens a tiny bit of movement of the lens really shows in the image. Have you tried the same experiment using a tripod and lining everything up precisely ?

 

Yes, the second photo showing the problem is with the camera on the tripod, In fact, when I line up the framelines (both vertical and horizontal), the framelines inside the M9 mirror the actual image.

 

BTW, this is the 25mm finder, and as I said, I still have the 15mm finder and I have used 21mm and another 25mm (all Zeiss, I used to love them), and none has this problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
pico

pico

Posted
Posted
What do you think yourself, what is wrong? It is quite a difference.

Isn't there a technician in the neighbourhood? Or an optician?

Jan

 

Can you put a level on the camera and tell whether it is really tilted, or level? Did you line up the frame using the camera's finder or only the external viewfinder?

 

I add +1 to the damaged external viewfinder.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Einst_Stein

Einst_Stein

Posted
Posted

I also highly suspect if it's user's error.

 

But I also vaguely remember overheard a guy in a museum said that M9 might have built-in perspective compensation for 21mm. It would be in effect if the lens selection is turned on and set to 21mm. I don't have 21mm lens, can't confirm. But it should be easy to verify by setting to 21mm vs. to say, 24mm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
richard_man

richard_man

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Can you put a level on the camera and tell whether it is really tilted, or level? Did you line up the frame using the camera's finder or only the external viewfinder?

 

I add +1 to the damaged external viewfinder.

 

Yes, I put a bubble level. When the internal M9 framelines are aligned, the bubble is level and the 25mm Z framelines are tilted. When I aligned with the Zeiss framelines, then the bubble and the internal framelines and the image as shown, are tilted.

 

Again, the 15mm Z finder I have currently does not have this problem, using the camera, and the same hotshoe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
pico

pico

Posted
Posted
Yes, I put a bubble level. When the internal M9 framelines are aligned, the bubble is level and the 25mm Z framelines are tilted. When I aligned with the Zeiss framelines, then the bubble and the internal framelines and the image as shown, are tilted.

 

okay, the Zeiss finder is either broken or it is not sitting flat in the flash shoe.

2.35 degree tilt. That is a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
algrove

algrove

Posted
Posted
I also highly suspect if it's user's error.

 

But I also vaguely remember overheard a guy in a museum said that M9 might have built-in perspective compensation for 21mm. It would be in effect if the lens selection is turned on and set to 21mm. I don't have 21mm lens, can't confirm. But it should be easy to verify by setting to 21mm vs. to say, 24mm.

 

Like Jaap says you are talking nonsense. Do you really own an M9? I ask because this comment would not be coming from a real M9 owner.

Link to post
Share on other sites
tobey bilek

tobey bilek

Posted
Posted

The hot shoe on Zeiss cameras is tilted to make up for the vf rotation. That is why they don`t work on a Leica.

 

My first 75 CV finder was off 3 degrees or so . Photo Village replaced it.

 

I will not buy anything that comes from that factory anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
richard_man

richard_man

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Mine is fine. You mentioned you bought it used-maybe there's the problem.

 

Yes, there's probably a problem and I am/was willing to pay to fix it. The main issue really is the lack of good customer support, as detailed in my post. It's a used item, someone may have dropped it, I am just unlucky. I can accept that. For the Sales Manager to flat out says (after I sent him the photos) that "with certainty" that it cannot be a Zeiss finder problem, is what I have issues with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
MarkP

MarkP

Posted
Posted
I also highly suspect if it's user's error.

 

But I also vaguely remember overheard a guy in a museum said that M9 might have built-in perspective compensation for 21mm. It would be in effect if the lens selection is turned on and set to 21mm. I don't have 21mm lens, can't confirm. But it should be easy to verify by setting to 21mm vs. to say, 24mm.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites
MarkP

MarkP

Posted
Posted

I think the sensible posts here all advise the VF is faulty. You clearly would have done numerous tests to confirm the alignment of camera vs VF. Most importantly there is a significant difference between alignment of internal and external viewfinders with is what confirms the problem. As I 've posted above there is a greater rotational error with the Zeiss finders which are not designed for the Leica hotshoe offset.

 

The question is whether it's worth repairing, buying a new Zeiss finder (~$400 US), or a Leica 24mm External VF new (~$800.00 US) or used.

 

Interestingly I have an old 24mm D-Lux 4 VF which I bought for that camera, and I recently tested it on the M9. It is smaller than the other Leica & Zeiss finders but quite usable). It is surprisingly accurate on the M9 despite the hotshoe/lens axis of the D-Lux is different to that of the M9. Worth considering if you want a cheaper option.

 

 

With respect to your experience with Zeiss they are a huge company which overall produces excellent products and provides excellent service (your previous experience). I don't think you should let one poor interaction.

 

Good luck,

mark

Link to post
Share on other sites
darylgo

darylgo

Posted
Posted

 

Interestingly I have an old 24mm D-Lux 4 VF which I bought for that camera, and I recently tested it on the M9. It is smaller than the other Leica & Zeiss finders but quite usable). It is surprisingly accurate on the M9 despite the hotshoe/lens axis of the D-Lux is different to that of the M9. Worth considering if you want a cheaper option.

 

When I compared the Leica M 24mm vs. D-Lux 4 VF they were identical optically, both had the same frameline view while in the hot shoe of the M9. The only difference I could see is material selection, the M is in a metal casing the D-Lux is in a plastic casing, the shoes/feet are both metal but slightly different. Seating in the hot shoe of the M9 was identical.

 

Agree this is a good alternative at a substantial savings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...