They're unusual, inexpensive, and shoot well. Like other inexpensive Eastern Block guns (Makarov), details that would be completely unacceptable in a Western made pistol are ignored. The interior finish of a CZ looks like it was gnawed by a bear. That doesn't impact their ability to launch bullets, so this can be justified at the price.
For some reason there are also outlandish claims made on their behalf. For example, they're a whole lot less "combat-proven" than many other popular pistols, and few military or police units have standardized on them.
The sights on the CZ 75B are mediocre at best, the triggers are highly variable (some good, some not-so-good) and most of them are polymer coated, functional but not especially attractive.
Accurate? Sure, they are decently accurate. But Gun Week compared the CZ75 to a Beretta 92. The Beratta 92 isn't generally acclaimed for accuracy and few would put them in the same league as a SIG P226. Yet with every load -out of nine - the Beretta was more accurate - average group size of 2.72" versus 3.19" by my calculations.
Gun Week Comparison Test
Some of the same people who say how wonderful they are also the first to say that $420 is too much to pay for one. The proof of the pudding is in the eating and if the CZ was as good as a SIG, I guess they'd be selling for $600 to $700, right? I have a CZ 85 Combat, and it's a good pistol. But with a Teddy Jacobson trigger job, recrowning, and ramp job (over $200 worth of work) is for sale for $550 in MA (where prices are high and new CZ's aren't available) - about the price of a used Beretta 92 - with no takers. So, please, CZ fanatics, step right up!
P.S. I don't want to sell it out of MA because I want to keep as many guns here as possible.