edwardkaraa wrote:
I've heard this from several sources. They actually use brass on aluminum, and the fitting is very good, but it seems the finishing of the focusing gears is a bit crude and not as refined as Leica.
I think the problem is more related to the quality of lubrication and adjustment that's coming out of the factory. Of course if the thread tolerances vary unacceptably, lubrication and adjustment only delay premature wear and failure. My C-Sonnar, bought new and the most heavily used of my ZMs, needed a rebuild after less than 3 years. Not acceptable performance - but I like the lens anyway.
It seems there is no consistency in this premature wear and failure. It is not model or time specific, but quite random. So I tend to believe it is just bad assembly, or inconsistency in the finishing of the parts as mentioned in the previous post. The ZM are after all Zeiss optics with the mechanical part designed and built by Cosina. Luckily none of my ZM has any mechanical issues so far, but 2 out of 5 had to go back to Zeiss for focus calibration.
I'm glad to hear you've had better performance from your ZMs, Edward. I prefer to believe that my experience is the exception, and that I'm just unlucky. I like the way Zeiss lenses render, that's all.
Maybe I'm too easy to please, but I tend to think that stuff does wear and break in use, so repairs are just a way of life. I've had Leica, Voigtlander, Canon, Minolta, and Mamiya gear repaired - no bias here. They all can develop problems.
Re the ZMs the only thing that irks me a bit is that Zeiss didn't step up at all, citing the warranty period expiration without any flexibility. 2.5 years of moderate use resulting in a rebuild - and I'm easy on my gear - suggests something wasn't right to begin with. Zeiss disagreed and I paid full price for the service.
Well, I don't think you're the exception, Mike. In a RFF poll, only 54% of the respondents (me included) have not had any wobble in their ZM. That leaves almost half of the owners who have had trouble with at least one of their lenses. The poll is not very scientific but quite informative, and the wobble issue is a real one.
I am also surprised about Zeiss not officially recognizing the problem, and not taking it into account in their repairs after the warranty expiry.
But as you say, I personally love the Zeiss rendering, and consider that for 1/3 to 1/5 the price of a Leica, I'm willing to put up with some extra repairs if I get to use the lens that I like.
Mike, may I ask how much that service cost you? I'm in the middle of comparing my options between a ZM lineup and a Leica lineup for my M9, and I've had to exchange a ZM lens in the past for issues, so that does worry me. These Leicas certainly seem better built, but I'm weighing whether it's worth the money, especially since I tend to lean more towards the "look" of the ZM lenses' output.
My used 50 Summicron and 28 elmarit ASPH cost me $2925, and my new ZM 28/2.8 and used ZM 50/2 cost me $1750. I'll be selling one of the pairs, and it is a tough decision. Even with the great deals that I got on the Leicas, I'd still be saving over $1K with the ZM lineup.
I am sad to hear about the Zeiss approach to out of warranty repairs. Gone are the times when costs were not the main concern and Zeiss and Leica offered "unlimited" lifetime warranties on their binoculars for example. (at least I think they have stopped)
As far as lenses are concerned, I do not read very often of other Zeiss lenses breaking down. I myself have had dozens in different mounts and all are fine. I do not use them a lot, but I am sure I would have discovered little faults every now and then. The worst I get are cleaning marks and one case of "Schneideritis".
Shorty after acquiring Contax G lenses I started a thread here as I was concerned about their durability, them being AF and looking quite fragile. That was a while ago and they are still fine.
Douglas, you will find a lot of info on RFF, but I also would like to know how much did Mike pay for the repairs.
The way I see it, in the worst case scenario, if I need to replace a ZM every 3 years with a new one, I still need 9 to 15 years to reach the price of the equivalent lens from Leica. And of course, not all lenses will develop the wobble, and it seems once repaired/rebuilt at Oberkochen, the wobble is gone for good.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Douglas, you will find a lot of info on RFF, but I also would like to know how much did Mike pay for the repairs.
The way I see it, in the worst case scenario, if I need to replace a ZM every 3 years with a new one, I still need 9 to 15 years to reach the price of the equivalent lens from Leica. And of course, not all lenses will develop the wobble, and it seems once repaired/rebuilt at Oberkochen, the wobble is gone for good.
Yeah, I've read a lot about it on RFF, and I've experienced issues myself, having owned several ZMs in the past for my NEX cameras, and that only makes me more worried.
Only replacing my ZMs once would make it more expensive than my Leica equivalents, so it is a gamble for me.
douglasf13 wrote:
Only replacing my ZMs once would make it more expensive than my Leica equivalents, so it is a gamble for me.
That is certainly a tough decision. For what it's worth, I've had my ZM lenses for a year now, all bought new, and from new stock directly from Oberkochen, and there are no signs of wobble so far. I suspect Zeiss may have improved the production quality silently, as they usually do. At least I would expect them to do so if they wanted to live up to their image.
Douglas, btw, would you be interested to post a few comparisons between the crons and the ZM? I am very curious to see if the differences in rendering are obvious or just in my head
edwardkaraa wrote:
Douglas, btw, would you be interested to post a few comparisons between the crons and the ZM? I am very curious to see if the differences in rendering are obvious or just in my head
Yeah, I'm actually still waiting for the ZMs to arrive. I'll try to find time to post a comparison, but it may be a bit. I'm super busy over here.
I, too, am hoping that Zeiss quietly improved the lenses. Even though I bought the ZM 50/2 used, the seller claims that it is from newer stock and there is no wobble at all. Fingers crossed.
p.s. for fun, I also ordered an old Summicron collapsible, since they are relatively cheap, so I should be able to do an M9 50mm comparison with the ZM 50/2, 50 Summicron V, Nokton 50/1.5 and 50 Summicron collapsible. Ugh, sounds exhausting. I should just sell all of them and buy a 50 Lux.
douglasf13 wrote:
Mike, may I ask how much that service cost you?
No harm in sharing, Doug. Cost was about $275 plus shipping for the rebuild. The CLA cost for the two lenses I've had with rough focus rings was about $150 or so each, plus shipping. The rebuild round-trip was about 3 weeks, btw.
Mike Tuomey wrote:
No harm in sharing, Doug. Cost was about $275 plus shipping for the rebuild. The CLA cost for the two lenses I've had with rough focus rings was about $150 or so each, plus shipping. The rebuild round-trip was about 3 weeks, btw.
I was expecting much more to be honest. I don't remember the exact amount, but a friend had a Contax lens repaired at Oberkochen afew years back, and it cost him just below the price of a new lens.
edwardkaraa wrote:
I was expecting much more to be honest. I don't remember the exact amount, but a friend had a Contax lens repaired at Oberkochen afew years back, and it cost him just below the price of a new lens.
Well, maybe I should feel better than I do. Zeiss might have been doing the work at a discount and I'm too dumb/naive to appreciate it, Edward.
Mike Tuomey wrote:
Well, maybe I should feel better than I do. Zeiss might have been doing the work at a discount and I'm too dumb/naive to appreciate it, Edward.
Sorry Mike, I didn't mean it this way. The fact is Zeiss did not mention any discount while doing the job, did they?
No offense taken, Edward. Just kidding around. No mention of discount that I remember. I am pleased with the work Zeiss did, by the way.
Just to repeat, none of these repairs have dimmed my enthusiasm for ZM lenses, fwiw. Some of them display incredibly good sweet spots: the 35/2 at f/5.6-8, the 50/1.5 at f2.8, just to name two I've discovered.
Back to topic: Edgars, have you come to any agreement with the seller?
He offered me 100 euros today. I do not think it enough though. Besides brassing it has the ding on the focusing ring, signs of tempering at the rear (4 visible) and the 3x1mm scratch on the rear element. Would you buy such lens for £400? That would be the price I would need to sell it on ebay for to get my money back. I think I would not.
