Best Leica M Body for use with Zeiss ZM 35/2.8 Biogon?

[craigclu]

I normally shoot medium format with both Mamiya 7 and Bronica RF645 systems (both of which I like very much and love the results). Lately, I've had need for a smaller, less obtrusive rig. I have a G1 and G2 (with 28, 45 and 90) but I've never really warmed to the system. I love the optics but find too many focus fails on a typical outing (mostly due to me).

I'm intrigued with the compact ZM (35/2.8). I'm a bit flustered trying to understand the Leica options and which body/finder magnification would be most ideal with this lens. I've not owned a Leica M but have handled a few over the years and would like to own one. I normally have an incident meter with me so I'm not hung up on whether it is a metered body or not... Any direction that someone could nudge me in?

 

[Dan Daniel]

M2. 35mm framelines only.

If you wear glasses, ask about seeing the edges.

 

[cbphoto]

I am an eyeglass wearer, and have a dedicated a .58 finder M6TTL for 35mm duties. My M2 doesn't cut it - I like to see the edges of the frame easily. Also look at the Zeiss Ikon. I haven't used one personally, but it is reputed to have a simply amazing finder. If you don't wear glasses, then any standard .72 finder should be fine.

I used to own that lens, and it is fantastic. More Zeiss than Zeiss.

 

[jimjm]

M2 is perfect with 35mm lenses, but I don't wear glasses. It may or may not be an issue if you do.

Nothing else in the viewfinder except the frameline and your subject. Perfect simplicity.

I've been eyeing the ZM 35/2.8 for some time also. Excellent reputation for sharpness and flare resistance, in an unobtrusive size. I just wish they made it with a 39mm filter size....

 

[Xmas]

My M2 wears the Cosina Voightlander /2.5 35mm (LTM) and I wear glasses, if you believe in name plates the zeiss nameplate is better.

The LTM one has a deeper optional hood.

A late M6 has a rubber eyepiece if you can't fit a plumbers o ring to a M2.

I have QL kit on my M2s cause I drop base plates or spools too frequently otherwise.

Cause I'm ambi Dexter I keep both eyes open and switch between the two as the x0.7 view in one does not annoy I understand that might need practise. I don't mind if I'm missing corners or blocked by hoods.

The critical thing is the ergonomics of the focus ring devices...

Noel

 

[darkosaric]

Budget 500$ --> M2
Budget 1000$ --> M6
Budget is not a problem --> MP

All with viewfinder 0.72

 

[Xmas]

an MP won't do IXMOO an M6 may need a replacement base plate latch.
Both have cluttered finders.
The M6 spot can flare out in gigs.

 

[cuthbert]

I would recommend a nice M4.

 

[Steve Bellayr]

The benefit of a Leica unlike medium format w/0 a meter is quick & unobtrusive photographing. If you think that you will need a meter then the M6 is your best bet. They are plentiful and much newer & easier to find in excellent condition which means that they will not need a CLA. Also, the viewfinder is not metal and it will not scratch eyeglasses if you were them. (I did scratch my eyeglasses on an old IIIf.) I have not found the 35 to be a problem on the 0.72 viewfinder. For a 28mm I agree with the above statement but I seldom use the 28mm. I do prefer the 0.85 for the 50mm, just my opinion.

 

[Xmas]

I think they changed the viewfinder eyepiece part way through the M6 run from metal to rubber but it is easy to fit an o ring.

Lots of people cannot abide the rangefinder white out, or the steel gears.

And the OP said he did not need a meter.

 

[4season]

Just for grins, why not check out the Voigtlander Bessa? Been awhile since I handled one, and at the time I thought it felt a bit cheap. But it wouldn't surprise me if they were the better picture-taking machines. And made by the same company producing products under the Zeiss brand, including the recent Zeiss Ikon camera and yes, ZM lenses. Less cachet maybe, but you can laugh all the way to the bank.

But if you simply have the urge to own a Leica camera, may I suggest a standard-issue (chrome or black chrome finish, no engravings on the top) M7, M6TTL or more recent M6 "classic"? 0.72x finder is most common and I think it's a good general purpose choice.

But that just reflects "My point of view: I've owned ~8 Leica M cameras over the past 2.5 decades, and I suppose some of it's idiosyncratic charms have worn off on me: I think I have grooves in my teeth in the shape of it's baseplate.

 

[250swb]

I think they changed the viewfinder eyepiece part way through the M6 run from metal to rubber but it is easy to fit an o ring.

Lots of people cannot abide the rangefinder white out, or the steel gears.

And the OP said he did not need a meter.

It would have to be a very early M6 to have a metal eyepiece (did any have a metal eyepiece?), even the last 1000 M4-P had a rubber eyepiece and they ran alongside the M6 for a short time. The 'white out' is easily cured by focusing on something else, or moving the eye in the viewfinder, and it is relatively rare anyway and doesn't in any case affect the ability to compose the photo. And the steel gears, well the camera was beefed up to take a motor drive so some people may think it's a bonus that there is nothing much that's going to wear in the winding mechanism.

Steve

 

[Mark Fisher]

If you don't care about a meter, get the M2. I have one that I use with the Voigtlander 35mm f2.5 and I can see the framelines well enough with my glasses. The nice thing about the M2 is that there is only only one set of framelines up at a time. It also only has 35, 50 and 90 framelines. That might sound like a limitation, but it really isn't that bad. You are missing the 28 (can't see with glasses), the 75mm (a bit unusual anyway) and the 135 (tiny and nearly unusable).

 

[Xmas]

It would have to be a very early M6 to have a metal eyepiece (did any have a metal eyepiece?), even the last 1000 M4-P had a rubber eyepiece and they ran alongside the M6 for a short time. The 'white out' is easily cured by focusing on something else, or moving the eye in the viewfinder, and it is relatively rare anyway and doesn't in any case affect the ability to compose the photo. And the steel gears, well the camera was beefed up to take a motor drive so some people may think it's a bonus that there is nothing much that's going to wear in the winding mechanism.

Steve

I had two

-one early though not as low as the one in link
-and a 94.

https://www.cameraquest.com/m6dif.htm

The have a premium $ if you don't need a meter.

And some people can't stand the referenced foibles.
The metal finder of a M2 is easy to fix, if you wear specs.

If you are in a gig facing Fresnels you won't focus on the band they fixed the fault in the MP...

Both of mine had zinc rot but that is rare.
I got a spare base plate for the late one to use IXMOO

If you are thinking of getting one it is best to try before you buy.

 

[John Koehrer]

And for an off the wall tidbit.
An M3 for the larger magnification and an accessory 35mm finder

 

[ColColt]

M2 or M4. I have an M2 and wear glasses so, it's hard to see the 35mm outline as it takes up most of the viewfinder and I find myself shifting my head about. Without glasses no problem.

 

[craigclu]

Thank you all for the inputs! As I was shopping for the lens, I ran into someone who was also selling an M6 TTL (.72X) that he was using with the lens. I had actually initially corresponded with him in regards to his satisfaction with the combination and in our interchange, I ended buying both the body and lens (which sound and appear in nice condition) for a very fair combination price. If I acted too quickly, I can always move the M6 as it seems there's a pretty steady market for these.... It's in shipment as I write this. I'll report on my experience in case this thread is searched by someone in the future. Again...Thanks!

 

[Xmas]

Hoe you are happy with it.

 

[Pioneer]

I know your purchase has already been made, but the best body for the ZM 35 is the ZI rangefinder. How can you miss with that big bright, beautiful viewfinder?

When you get tired of the M6 go buy a ZI and enjoy the rangefinder Leica should have become.