I have two Hasselblads and two 35mm SLRs and no Leicas. I do not miss Leicas.
Leica MP thoughts
-
A
- Thread starter rmjranch
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale BOOK SALE! Weston, Karsh, Kenna, Worth, Sexton
- Started by AnselMortensen
-
For Sale Complete Mamiya RB67 Pro SD collections with camera bags
- Started by orbitaldebris
-
Want to Buy JOBO ATL 1500/1000 or JOBO CPP2
- Started by balazsfff
-
For Sale Foto-100 bulk roll, 100'
- Started by MCB18
-
Sold Hasselblad ELM battery adapters x2
- Started by blee1996
Forum statistics
I have two Hasselblads and two 35mm SLRs and no Leicas. I do not miss Leicas.
Maybe this is obvious, but you can get a less expensive reasonable Leica (M2, M4, M5, M6) that provides 35mm lens framing if that Leica is in only fair cosmetic condition (rather than EX+ or mint).
I like my cameras as mechanically, optically, and cosmetically perfect as I can get them (and keep them that way while using them) - but there are times I wish I just had a beater to toss over my shoulder every day.
I like my cameras as mechanically, optically, and cosmetically perfect as I can get them (and keep them that way while using them) - but there are times I wish I just had a beater to toss over my shoulder every day.
I've been keeping an eye on used M2's and Hasselblad 50x's for about two years and I'm yet to see the latter for the price of the former, condition being equal...
Leicas are not expensive.
I have had Leica in the past a IIIG, and a Canon 7, I like rangefinders, but have not replaced either which were ripped off when I living in Italy, not so much for the cost of a body but the cost of lens, mabe a Bessa R with just a couple of lens. Of the Leica I have at least handled I really like the M6 with a winder.
I guess it all depends upon which model you are looking at. I know the MP that the OP was talking about is expensive. A very good friend of mine owns a pre M Leica. I don't think it's worth a lot.
I shot 35mm SLR's for many years and I was never interested in a Leica. A couple years ago I bought a digital Fujifilm X100s. Some call it the faux Leica or a fake rangefinder. Anyway, after shooting it I thought a real rangefinder like a 35mm Leica might be a lot of fun. I did a little research on Leica cameras, especially the M3, but it's more than I can afford unless I sell some of my other gear which I don't want to do.
When I win the lottery I'll buy a Leica along with a new Cooke 8x10 triple convertible lens, and a Linhof Technika and ...................
This thread hit the bottom with mentioning of ken r, brining Fuji digital x fake RF crap here and statements what Hasselblad is less expensive than Leica.
You could get film M for 600$ and 30-150$ lenses with plenty of sharpness and character.
You could get film M for 600$ and 30-150$ lenses with plenty of sharpness and character.
I completely understand if you don't like Ken or digital but the OP mentioned Leica MP's. Here are a few MP's on Ebay. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_fro...C0.H0.XLeica+MP.TRS0&_nkw=Leica+MP&_sacat=625
I sold a mint- Hasselblad 500 c/m with 80mm Planar on Ebay a few years ago and I only got $1,000 which was what I felt it was worth. Of course it all depends upon which model Leica and which model Hasselblad.
Here are some M3 prices. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_fro...2.A0.H0.XLeica+M3.TRS0&_nkw=Leica+M3&_sacat=0
M2 prices rival those of Hasselblad c/m too. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_fro...2.A0.H0.XLeica+M2.TRS0&_nkw=Leica+M2&_sacat=0
Hasselblad 500c/m prices. http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2060353.m570.l1313.TR6.TRC2.A0.H0.XHasselblad+500+c/m.TRS0&_nkw=Hasselblad+500+c/m&_sacat=0
Of course if you are saying my comparing Hasselblad to Leica is like comparing apples to oranges then you make a good point.
Last edited:
The MP is essentially an old M6 with an even older rewind knob from an M3.
The only reason to buy an MP is if you're a collector that wants all the models or if you just want a "new" (2003) camera.
Otherwise, an M2, M3, M4, M5, or M6 in good condition costs far less.
(M3 doesn't have 35mm frame lines)
The only reason to buy an MP is if you're a collector that wants all the models or if you just want a "new" (2003) camera.
Otherwise, an M2, M3, M4, M5, or M6 in good condition costs far less.
(M3 doesn't have 35mm frame lines)
I came to use Leica later in my career when I could actually afford it in 2006. By the end of that year I was hooked, had an M6TTL, 28/2, 35/1.4 and 50/1.4.
In 2008 I found a killer deal on a black paint MP3 kit that was never used for $5K, had the LHSA 50mm 1.4 and Leicavit with it. At $8k new, it was even more expensive than the MP and really did not offer that much more than my RF patch tuned M6 did. At the end of the project I had used it for with some 300 rolls of film through it, I sold it in 2011 for just under $13K.
Now I use a customized M6TTL, M3 and M240 with a 28mm 2.8 asph, 35mm V4 Summicron, 35mm 1.4 FLE and 50 Zeiss Planar. Fantastic cameras and lenses, results well worth the money. I would never likely buy an MP but just another M6 and have a good CLA done and my customizations of course, MP RF patch, removal of frame lines I will never use, 90mm and 135mm and call it perfect.
In 2008 I found a killer deal on a black paint MP3 kit that was never used for $5K, had the LHSA 50mm 1.4 and Leicavit with it. At $8k new, it was even more expensive than the MP and really did not offer that much more than my RF patch tuned M6 did. At the end of the project I had used it for with some 300 rolls of film through it, I sold it in 2011 for just under $13K.
Now I use a customized M6TTL, M3 and M240 with a 28mm 2.8 asph, 35mm V4 Summicron, 35mm 1.4 FLE and 50 Zeiss Planar. Fantastic cameras and lenses, results well worth the money. I would never likely buy an MP but just another M6 and have a good CLA done and my customizations of course, MP RF patch, removal of frame lines I will never use, 90mm and 135mm and call it perfect.
But that's the thing..it's not.
I $1000.00 film camera that will last 50+ years? (M6)
In my book that's not expensive considering that in a few years you could sell it for at least what you paid for it if you chose to do so.
A Nikon F3 is going for $250.00 to even $600.00 right now on ebay depending on the condition and extras, that's not THAT different when you consider what we spend our money on; the difference between a Leica and an F3 is one less trip to McDonalds a week for a year.
A Leica M in fair cosmetic condition (minor scratches, dings, bright marks) but fully functional is maybe $600.
Right now, they are some Leica M3s in Hamburg shop from €399 - €799.
Few years ago doesn't count. ebay prices either. And comparing of old 500 c/m to new MP is incorrect. I purchased M4-P and M3 this year for $700. On-line and locally, not from ebay. Working, not trashed ones. Leitz, Canon RF and some Viogtlander 35 RF lenses are obtainable for under 250$. FSU lenses, which are fine optically and in like new condition are available under $100 (adapter included).
I wasn't comparing apples to oranges. Nothing to compare. I don't need any Hassel for free. It is useless apparatus for my photography needs. Waste of time, space and film. I went through all bunch of film gear. Leica is the one I need and trust.
Yeah, you are right. Comparing a 500 c/m to an MP isn't quite fair. I guess I'm being a bit of a format snob. I just can't see spending that much money for a Leica camera when you can buy a cheap 35mmm SLR and a medium format camera instead. If I'm going to spend that kind of money I want a larger negative. Of course that's me and others may not even care about medium format.
It's all supply and demand. With Leica prices as high as they are, obviously there is a big demand for them.
Why this fascination people have with the MP? What does the MP offer that you can't get with an M6 or an M4?
Metering? Get the M6. Frameline preview lever? Get M2 or M4.
The MP is ~$4300 - an excellent condition M4 or M6 is $700-$1200.
Metering? Get the M6. Frameline preview lever? Get M2 or M4.
The MP is ~$4300 - an excellent condition M4 or M6 is $700-$1200.
Well, the OP asked for thoughts for the MP, thats why. I currently use M6 as my main rangefinder and a Bessa R2 as a second body. I cant really justify getting a MP, but people get them mostly because you get a current production Leica with Leica warraty, something that you dont get with a M6 or older models. Can you live without that? you certainly can. You get better pictures with a MP than an older Leica (like a M6)? I doubt it, but I cant deny the safety you feel owning a current production camera with the manufacturer warranty.
Regards.
Getting new Leica gear is very special. Un-boxing and getting it registered. I have tried it with "cheap" Summarit-M 35 earlier this year. I also learned recently, with new camera as MP, Leica gives ... free download of 200$ Adobe PP software.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2015
- Messages
- 61
- Format
- Medium Format
I am the OP for this thread. Thank you for all comments. I had NO real information on an MP. I spoke with a "Leica" user and he suggested an MP. After everyone's kind comments, it seems that there are better buys than an MP. What is the best "BUY" in a used Leica, and which lens or lenses would you recommend? I have no problem buying used. Also anything I buy used, will go to a Leica person, for a CLA. Like a Hasselblad, it is a mechanical system and needs maintenance. The camera will be used for fun, not professionally. I do sell some of my work, but do not see it as that use.
The advice given to the OP, likely with good intentions, I believe is flawed.
True, you can get a warranty, but it comes with a price $3000+ higher than an M6. That $3000 will buy a nice lens and also cover any repairs to the M6, should they be needed.
My bet is that if you picked up an older Leica M (or even a Barnack Leica), and the 1-second shutter speed sounded smooth and accurate, then the camera is probably good. The only other major things to check for is shutter capping, rangefinder alignment and accuracy and any damage to the shutter curtains. These checks are very easy to do and that is why I believe any other M camera is better than buying an MP.
I think they where posted before, but this is good info:
http://www.japancamerahunter.com/2012/11/what-is-the-best-leica-m-for-you/
https://www.cameraquest.com/mguide.htm
It all depends what are your likings. For me, the best Leica is M6, because it have what I want, nothing less, nothing more.
-TTL metering
-28mm Framelines (I love 28mm).
-Fully mecanical.
-Easy loading.
Again, its boils down to what you would like. If you dont need a TTL metering, M4-P are great (I own one of those). They are esentially a meterless M6.
Im not saying that notion is true or economically valid
Just passing the reason given by people that bought MP.
Just to add; when you buy your used Leica M camera, the "go to" service folks are:
Don Goldberg
Sherry Krauter
Youxin Ye
I've used Sherry and Don and both are excellent and reliable. I've heard really good things about Youxin Ye also.
Don Goldberg
Sherry Krauter
Youxin Ye
I've used Sherry and Don and both are excellent and reliable. I've heard really good things about Youxin Ye also.
There is always a used MP...
Bargain used Leicas are seldom a bargain in the long run, I've had many M bodies go through my hands and most bargain cameras require an additional $200-400 of work to bring them back to proper working order. That is if proper working order is of any interest to the shooter... "Makes pictures" order seems good enough for most folks here, and in that case that $900 M6 could be just the ticket. Might explain why there is so often such vitriol as seen in this thread towards a Leica M.
Just got an M5 back from Don Goldberg, that I found at a very good price locally. Once he opened it up we learned that some hack had "CLA'ed" the camera at some point, there were numerous parts in disrepair or not reassembled correctly. Not as bad as it could have been, only $270 of his time. Sherry Krauter rebuilt a CL for me a few years ago that had the same treatment at some point in the past, she told me lots of M bodies are in this state. Do they make pictures? Yes. Do they work as intended? No. Might explain why there is so often such vitriol as seen in this thread towards a Leica M.
It is extremely unlikely that a newer body like an MP will have been tampered with under the hood, these cameras are built to work for many years before needing service, and so will work as intended for the purchaser for a long while.
Yep, they are expensive. So are many cars, many golf clubs, many watches, etc. etc. etc. etc. if one enjoys shooting with a 35mm rangefinder the other options are certainly much less substantial or smooth in the hand. I've used the Hexar, the Ikon RF, and many of the Japanese RF cameras from the 70s. The Hexar comes closest, in my opinion, to the M in quality and "feel" but They have their weak points, namely the RF alignment. The Ikon is a decent camera, overpriced at their current used prices I believe. Rough film advance, noisy shutter, but a nice viewfinder.
If an onboard meter is desired I would suggest a used MP, or an M6 that has been recently serviced by one of the top repairers mentioned above or Leica themselves. If you are not in need of the meter, then an M4 with the same service caveat would be my suggestion. The M2 and 3 are fussier to load. The M5 is also a wonderful camera, mostly the same mechanics (shutter and RF) as the M4, in a different box so a different experience in the hand. Meters are the weak point in the M5, and that can be an expensive fix.
I came to a Leica after thirty some years of shooting professionally with Nikon SLRs. I haven't picked up a Nikon since. Perfect for my way of shooting: simple, concise, precise. And they open up the possibility to use an enormous range of lenses via adapters.
Shoot well!
Bargain used Leicas are seldom a bargain in the long run, I've had many M bodies go through my hands and most bargain cameras require an additional $200-400 of work to bring them back to proper working order. That is if proper working order is of any interest to the shooter... "Makes pictures" order seems good enough for most folks here, and in that case that $900 M6 could be just the ticket. Might explain why there is so often such vitriol as seen in this thread towards a Leica M.
Just got an M5 back from Don Goldberg, that I found at a very good price locally. Once he opened it up we learned that some hack had "CLA'ed" the camera at some point, there were numerous parts in disrepair or not reassembled correctly. Not as bad as it could have been, only $270 of his time. Sherry Krauter rebuilt a CL for me a few years ago that had the same treatment at some point in the past, she told me lots of M bodies are in this state. Do they make pictures? Yes. Do they work as intended? No. Might explain why there is so often such vitriol as seen in this thread towards a Leica M.
It is extremely unlikely that a newer body like an MP will have been tampered with under the hood, these cameras are built to work for many years before needing service, and so will work as intended for the purchaser for a long while.
Yep, they are expensive. So are many cars, many golf clubs, many watches, etc. etc. etc. etc. if one enjoys shooting with a 35mm rangefinder the other options are certainly much less substantial or smooth in the hand. I've used the Hexar, the Ikon RF, and many of the Japanese RF cameras from the 70s. The Hexar comes closest, in my opinion, to the M in quality and "feel" but They have their weak points, namely the RF alignment. The Ikon is a decent camera, overpriced at their current used prices I believe. Rough film advance, noisy shutter, but a nice viewfinder.
If an onboard meter is desired I would suggest a used MP, or an M6 that has been recently serviced by one of the top repairers mentioned above or Leica themselves. If you are not in need of the meter, then an M4 with the same service caveat would be my suggestion. The M2 and 3 are fussier to load. The M5 is also a wonderful camera, mostly the same mechanics (shutter and RF) as the M4, in a different box so a different experience in the hand. Meters are the weak point in the M5, and that can be an expensive fix.
I came to a Leica after thirty some years of shooting professionally with Nikon SLRs. I haven't picked up a Nikon since. Perfect for my way of shooting: simple, concise, precise. And they open up the possibility to use an enormous range of lenses via adapters.
Shoot well!
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |