I have done no more than handle a Zeiss Ikon, but I have "Voigtlander" Bessas L, T and R2. The L is disgusting in any comparison, but fulfils its brief admirably - it is a simple box with an acceptable shutter and a decent enough meter to hold extreme wideangles. The T is a much better engineered camera, the R2 better still. It's not in Leica build quality country, but it's certainly well built enough for most things. It's pretty capable, and a better choice than an M if you want to use flash. But who uses flash with a rangefinder? Not I, for one. The shutter is substantially noisier than the Leica's, but in every other way the camera is every bit as effective as the M. Except mine is green...... Nick --- Chris Wong <chris_wong@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > The new Zeiss Ikon will be coming out soon. The body > is around US$1600, > substantially lower than a new Leica M7. Personally, > whether the camera > is of "highest quality" depends on the situation. A > well-built camera > such as Leica that survives a cliff fall does not > auto-magically give > us the highest quality picture. Usually, it's the > lens that gives us > different properties of the pictures, the body is > merely just a black > box. At least that's how I view it most of the > time. For example, if I > mount the new Zeiss Ikon with the same Leica lens > one used on the M7, > are we really going to see differences in quality? > I admit that > different types of camera bodies influence how you > take the picture, > but as to the quality... that's very subjective. If > we compare apple > to apple (Leica M7 rangefinder to Zeiss Ikon > rangefinder), how much > differences are we going to see? > > I can see differences between a Rolleiflex vs. a > Leica M due to the > difference in shooting style, but what if we compare > two similar > range-finder bodies that take the same m-mount Leica > lens? > > I don't have 15 or 20+ experiences in photography, > but I just can't > understand how different types of black boxes can > make a drastic > difference on the light traveling from the lens to > the film. >:-) > > Disclaimer: I assume all the bodies have accurate > shutter speeds and > comparable mechanical vibration that may or may not > contribute to the > degradation of picture quality. > > Chris "is a newbie" > > > Regards, > > > > Austin > > > > > > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com