Leica M5 any opinions?

[Eric Rose]

The M5 is designed for shooters. It's easier to use than the M3, has a spot meter and BUILT. It's also quite a bit quieter than the M3. I have both cameras so am speaking from experience.

 

[2F/2F]

IMO, they are just fine, and due to the collective hatred of them, they *should* be the way to make a bargain entry into the Leica M world. However, they are NOT actually a bargain. They are ridiculously overpriced in my experience. The M3 and M2 (and M1 if all you need to do is zone focus) are the bargains of the system (if you don't count non-Leica bodies).

 

[mjflory]

Stephen Gandy says in his article about the M5 that Japanese collectors drove the prices up in the mid-90's -- and they just stayed up. It's a very thorough article -- it also lists lenses that won't work with the M5 -- and worth the read. I considered for a long time whether to get an M6 and decided on an M5 instead. Though it differs in ergonomics from the other M bodies, I found it very familiar after years of using another unpopular Leica, the CL. They were developed at about the same time, and clearly some of the same considerations went into both of them: match-needle spot metering, protruding shutter-speed dials, even the vertical way the cameras were designed to be hung around one's neck. (The overhanging shutter-speed dial is even closer in design to that of my Canon EF SLR, and Canon too abandoned the idea -- unfortunately, I think.)

 

[Nokton48]

The M5 is the forgotten Leica.

If you enjoy the light meter arms shadow in your negative when it doesn't swing out of the way as you press the shutter release, then it is the camera for you.

You should have your M5 serviced.

 

[Chaplain Jeff]

IMO, they are just fine, and due to the collective hatred of them, they *should* be the way to make a bargain entry into the Leica M world. However, they are NOT actually a bargain. They are ridiculously overpriced in my experience. The M3 and M2 (and M1 if all you need to do is zone focus) are the bargains of the system (if you don't count non-Leica bodies).

Hello,

I bought my M5 from KEH for $800 three years ago.

When I dropped my M3 the same year, my insurance company covered it's replacement cost at $1600.

That said, I'd say the M5 is a VERY affordable entry into Leica M photography.

 

[Richard Jepsen]

I recommend the three lug version which has a 28mm frame. That's what I use most often.

I am surprised by this statement. According to the sales brochure the M5 has 35/50/90/135 framelines. There is no control or internal configuration difference between the 2 and 3 lug versions.

 

[Chaplain Jeff]

Hello,

Be surprised all you want by it. It's the truth.

 

[John Koehrer]

It may have had the Rf replaced. I've seen another camera with the 28 & the fellow who had it was insulted when I suggested it had been serviced.

 

[Richard Jepsen]

Any M5 with a 28mm frameline has been altered. The original camera only had 35/50/90/135 frames. We don't want forum readers to get bad information.

 

[Venchka]

I have both

Any M5 with a 28mm frameline has been altered. The original camera only had 35/50/90/135 frames. We don't want forum readers to get bad information.

Yup, DAG installed the 28/90, 50/75, 35/135 frame lines on my 3 lug M5 before I bought it. My other M5 was orginally a 2 lug model. Sherry K. installed all of the 3 lug updates, again before I bought it.

 

[Vanishing Point Ent.]

all the Leica snobs, disapprove of the CLE

What are you talking about? How does one go about getting this effect? I can't make Bigfoot or Bubba do that.

Those who own and use the M5 love it.

Those who neither own nor use the M5 seem to dislike it.

Go figure.

Wayne
Who left Louisiana and found Texas on August 29, 2005.

" One can say the same thing about the Minolta CLE,
the best m camera that Leica never made."

And it took how many years for Konica to attempt the
same camera.

About the same time as the Konica, Leica came out with their version of the same camera.

So why do all the Leica snobs, disapprove of the CLE,
when obviously, it was ahead of it's time.

Don't believe me, go to Steven Gandy's camera quest
http://www.cameraquest.com/cle.htm

Also here's what he has to say about the m5.
http://www.cameraquest.com/m5.htm

 

[Xmas]

The M5 in use is pretty similar to a M4 or M3, apart from size which most people could ignore.

It canot meter with the early lenses e.g. 21mm SA but that is similarly true of the other metered M cameras, and you also cannot collapse lenses completely. You need to be carefull what you mount on a M5, during camera outings...

It does not accept the concentric cassettes (IXMOO) and needs cassettes to the DIN standard (for rewind). Some of the later Ms also cannot accept IXMOO - unless you change the baseplate lock.

But other than that it is an M.

It was really expensive when it was new, and Leitz caught a cold. All the later M's have a different build standard which annoys lots of people, which is why they use antiques.

But it is a nice camera for photos...

Noel

 

[thomasw_]

Hi,

I had a M5 and the biggest knock against it was the match needle metering in low light. As I have big man hands, the M5 was a nice ergonomic fit.

 

[Vincenzo Maielli]

I own a M5; it's a true Leica M camera, the last built in the true old "Wetzlar style". Work as silk, the meter is accurate, sensitive and reliable, if you know the inside defects/features of the CDS cell (memory and laziness) and how to overcome them.
Forgotten Leica M? Maybe, by the seventhies Leica users, full of absurd prejudices. The much criticized metering system work very well in mine M5, from 1974, without any problems or repairs. The Leica M5 (and also the Leica CL, that i own and that have a similar TTL metering system) work perfectly with my CV 15/4.5VM.
I was truly and hopelessly bewitched by this camera...
Ciao.
Vincenzo

 

[clayne]

Seeing as I'd rather not have a meter in the camera my M4 fits the bill for me quite well. No love for the M5 here.

 

[cmo]

Just in case it becomes defective spare parts are a huge problem. There is no place on planet earth where you can buy parts for an M5 lightmeter. A dead lightmeter in an M5 is like a death sentence. Of course, everything else works without the meter, but for that it's an expensive M Leica. An M5 is an expensive collectors item. You are probably much better of with an M6 - camera, meter and price are much better and you get spare parts.

 

[Vincenzo Maielli]

The M6 is a more modern camera than M5, it's true, but the RF of the M6 is little less good than the RF of the M5 (same to RF of the Leica M4). The metering system of the M6, however, is better and more simple than the metering system of the M5.
Ciao.
Vincenzo

 

[Frank Bunnik]

I used both the M5 and the M6 and I think the M5 is the MUCH better camera. Better viewfinder and setting the shutterspeed/aperture with the lightmeter works much nicer because the shutterspeeds are visible in the viewfinder as well as to which side the aperture on the lens has to be moved to get the correct exposure. If I remember correctly, you could also set the shutterspeed dial between the speeds on the dial.

 

[Lee L]

If I remember correctly, you could also set the shutterspeed dial between the speeds on the dial.

True. The M5 and CL both had continuously variable shutter speed dials. They don't just default to the nearest detent.

Lee

 

[clayne]

I used both the M5 and the M6 and I think the M5 is the MUCH better camera. Better viewfinder and setting the shutterspeed/aperture with the lightmeter works much nicer because the shutterspeeds are visible in the viewfinder as well as to which side the aperture on the lens has to be moved to get the correct exposure. If I remember correctly, you could also set the shutterspeed dial between the speeds on the dial.

The inter-detent setting is pretty cool but I'd say that shutterspeed in the viewfinder is totally unnecessary. Part of using a Leica is adjusting the shutter speed as you move from one scene to another and observing light before you take the shot. Or alternatively leaving it fixed and adjusting aperture instead.

 

[df cardwell]

The M5 was widely LOVED by a class of shooters who made pictures for pay.

A spot meter made color available light very easy to do. The other option, at the time, was a Canon F1, which was dark as heck and had a huge metering area. I survived back then shooting stage work, and the M5 was a joy.

It was bigger than an M4, and it could be shot at slow speeds. It had the bad luck to be released as the US economy was beginning to tank because of the war. The OPEC war followed, and the stagflation of the '70s killed it off.

Leica posers, I mean owners who never knew how to shoot pictures, didn't like them. But they don't like anything.

An M5, a 50 Summilux, and a roll of Kodachrome was a real treat back then. Remember, it metered more accurately, in lower light, than ANYTHING else could come close to. A wonderful camera.

.

 

[Vincenzo Maielli]

No matter what a person things about the Leica M5, but one thing is truly extraordinary, for a camera produced for only 4 years: for better or for worse, is the most talked Leica M ever. I own a complete collection of photographic articles and review, in italian or english languages, on the Leica M cameras and lenses. The Leica M on which is written most is precisely the M5. Mean something, after all...
Ciao.
Vincenzo

 

[Venchka]

Two kinds of people

I took Bigfoot out today. Wandering around shopping, lunch, more wandering. I loaded Fuji Provia 100F and attached the 90mm Elmarit-M that I bought last week. First outing for the camera+lens+film combination.

It'll be a week or more before the slides confirm my early impression. Another excellent combination. 1973 camera mates perfectly with 2001 lens.

Once more I realize just how much I like using an M5. The 90mm lens balances perfectly. A joy to use.

There are two kinds of people in this world. Those who get it. Those who don't.

I get it!

PS: Don't you love it when somebody asks for advice and then disappears?

 

[Larry Bullis]

Back in 1975, I borrowed an M5 with the 50mm Summilux from a dealer in Seattle. I had been a Contax user; loved them but was concerned because the shutters got jammed so often. I don't mean the Contax everyone knows now, the original, Contax II's and III's. I'd just burned another one out. I'd always wanted to try a Leica, and when offered I couldn't turn it down. I used it to photograph dancers in dark places. I was immediately impressed - and those who've used Leicas to make their livings will understand - with the speed at which film could be moved through it and the success rate when film went through it fast. It integrated into my intuitive working mode perfectly. When I had to give it back, they offered me an M4 at a good price, and I took it. Later I picked up an M2, and I used them both on many magazine assignments for many years. I used Pentaxes too, but my tool of choice was always the pair of Leicas. One clincher -- photographing in sub 20°F temperatures, the Pentaxes froze up; ripped the film on rewind. The Leicas worked perfectly. Always, no matter the conditions.

So fast forward some 30 years, I came into a bit of money; just enough to buy a used Leica body. I went for the M5 with no hesitation. I loved all of them, but the M5 had a certain draw for me. I feel very fortunate to have one. I'm no longer shooting for clients, so I only need one with my current beater M2 as a backup. I've found that with the 40mm Cosina Voitländer f/1.4 single coated Nokton, I have pretty much all I need supplemented with a couple other focal lengths - the 135 Hektor and the old 85mm Canon Serinar pretty much do it, but I might like to have something wider, too. The old Summilux was great, but I like the Nokton better. I'd like also to have a 50mm rigid Summicron - the DR or its non-DR sibling. Those because there has never been anything that compares with them.

Sure the M5 is bigger, and it isn't quite the same as the rest of the M series in the way it feels and works. However, I am absolutely convinced that it is the best Leica ever. I agree with DF Cardwell on this one. If you are a collector, you might not like it but if you shoot for blood, you can't beat it. Tough as nails, probably the strongest camera ever made. I'd stake my life on it. Also, I love the fact that collectors so often revile it - that will change, but so far, it has been a bit less dear when it comes to buying one. It's been a great deal.

Some people seem to think that if the light meter goes out you're a dead duck. I never had a light meter in the camera in M2's M4's etc. I've pumped an enormous amount of film, and I always carry a spare light meter. If my light meter dies, I'll try to get it fixed and I bet I can, but if I can't, it won't slow me down so much as i'd notice.

My M5 is due back from DAG next week. I ordered a complete overhaul with perfect confidence. I paid in advance.

 

[Venchka]

Sherry K. gave Bigfoot the Royal treatment right before I bought it. DAG gave Bubba a CLA and new frame lines right before I bought it. I have a stash of real PX625 batteries. I'm good to go.

I do have too many lenses. I'll get that sorted out one of these days and send a few extras along to new homes. The 51.9mm DR Summicron won't be going anywhere. I totally agree. Nothing before or since like a DR Summicron.

As for collectors...Imagine the price of the M3 if Leitz had only made 70,000+? Thank goodness for those who "Don't get it."