Leica wannabe owner has a few questions...

[Terrence Brennan]

I have finally decided to buy a 35mm rangefinder camera, and I am seriously considering a Leica. I could buy a Voigtlander (or another brand), but I would prefer the unmatchable quality that Leica cameras have. I know a Leica owner who says that a Leica is a lifetime investment.

For those of you who use other than Leicas, please don't bother telling me that your camera is what I should buy; if I can wing the $$$, it's going to be Leica-or-bust for me.

My question centers more on which Leica I should buy. I have used (borrowed) M3s and M4s in the past, and own a damaged-beyond-cost-effective-repair Leica IIb. Also, I have in my possession a copy of the 1974 Leica Manual, which gives a profile of the Leicas up to and including the M5.

Most of my 35mm shooting is done with a pair of motorized Nikon Fs; my primary lenses are 35mm and 105mm, and I also have a 24mm, 50mm, 200mm and a 55mm Micro-Nikkor. I expect that the first lens I buy for my Leica will be a 35mm, followed by perhaps a 90mm. And I am looking for a shooter, not collectables. I want a camera, not jewlery that you might take pictures with.

I don't seriously expect that I can make a rangefinder camera do everything that a motorized SLR does, and vice versa. For example, I don't expect that I can fit a 300mm to a Leica, anymore than I can make images unobtrusively with a hulking big, noisy Nikon F. Quiet shooting is what I am aiming for.

I know very little about the more modern M-series cameras, and that's the info that I am looking for. I have read a few things about some of the various models that were produced, not all of it good. For example, I read---on this thread, I think---that the M4-2 was a bit of a dog compared to the original M4; problems with the wind mechanism, AFAIR.

I should add that I wear eyeglasses.

I consider the Minolta-Leica hybrids out of the running. Ditto for screw-thread Leicas; I spent too many years with screw-thread Pentaxes and that IIb!

So then, what are the significant operational and quality differences, in the current MP/M4P/M6/M7 cameras? How do they compare with the classic M3/M4 cameras? How about ease of loading? What about the availability of accessories such as winders/motor drives, et cetera?

Any comments or personal input and/or experiences would be welcome. I can run a Google search and read info from a video screen, but what I am after is input from shooters who use them regularly. All information will be gratefully received!

 

[Tim Gray]

I started out with an M6. Seemed like the best balance of old and new, in terms of features (frames and meter) and need for service. If you look around, you should be able to get one that is functioning fine and doesn't need to be serviced right away. That's not always true of the M2s and M3s. The M6 has the 6 frame lines, the 'modern' quick loading system. It's not *that* much more than an M3 in good shape.

The M6TTL would also be a good buy, but it doesn't add anything over the M6 that I'd ever use, so why spend the extra money. The only two real differences are a larger shutter dial that turns in the opposite direction, and TTL *flash* metering.

I also eventually purchased an M7. It's a great camera; I like it more than my M6. For the most part, I use it in full manual. However, it does have auto exposure (AE) which is very useful when you want to use it. I personally like the ISO reader (saves some time and prevents lapses in memory). I also like the display - nice when doing long exposures, etc. It is more battery dependent than the M6, but batteries last a LONG time and are very small. If I ever did get in a jam battery-wise, I'd just use the M6. The M7 does have two functional speeds even without batteries, which would get you by in a lot of situations (1/125 and 1/60).

If you get an M7, get one with the new optical ISO reader or be prepared to send it in.

I think the M6 is the sweet spot of the lineup in terms of prices, features, and age. Of course, they might have gone up since I bought mine 4 years ago.

I wear eyeglasses too. Well, I don't, I wear contacts. To be honest, I don't think I'd shoot a Leica if I didnt' wear contacts. Depending on your style of glasses, the 35 frames could be hard to see. I shoot a lot of 28mm, and those are hard to see *without* glasses.

Accessories are available. I've been tempted to pick up a trigger winder or a motor winder because I've seen some come up recently for good prices. But I realize that I'd never use them. I do have the M-grip, but I never use that either.

They are pretty easy to load once you get used to it. The only problem is finding a place for the bottom while it's off. Camera, bottom plate, old roll of film, new roll of film, and only two hands for all of that.

 

[Tim Gray]

Oh yeah, I've only briefly handled one, but the Zeiss Ikon is a nice camera too. You might like it more. Especially since it has a bigger viewfinder.

 

[Paul Goutiere]

I use a M2 and a M4-P quite regularly. I like them because of their simplicity and reliability(so far).
-Not like loading a Nikon but easy enough.
-I have motor winder..don't bother.
-I have a Leica meter MR, but use it seldom, prefer the hand held meter.
-Occasionally I like the polarizing filter, but tricky to use. (yup, a polarizing filter)
-The M4-P and M2 will both take a 35mm lens without the "bug eyes".
-the MP,M4, M6 and M7; I dunno.

I like the M2; simple, 35,50, and 90mm lens frames.

 

[clayne]

M4 with 35/2 Summicron. That's it. That's all you need. If you insist on something newer (which offer no real advantages) then get an M6 classic.

 

[John Lawrence]

I can recommend the M6.

This camera is seriously maligned by Leica snobs who consider it not to be a "proper" Leica because it doesn't have brass gears or some such nonsense, but in my opinion it's everything a Leica should be and the natural evolution of the earlier M cameras. I've never had any trouble with mine and use if for shooting rather than displaying it in a glass case, examining the gearing or fretting over whether the Leica dot on it is red or black!

Prices for these cameras are very good (for Leicas) and there's no problem with parts availability. The built in meter is excellent and a lot more convenient than the MR meter (and yes I have used / owned earlier M models) which adds bulk and extra weight. All in all a really good, usable and very underrated camera.

Have fun whatever you decide to go with.

John

 

[luke_h]

I'm an owner of a Leica M2. I had a Voigtlander Bessa R3A prior and a Bessa R2A (still own it.) I've owned all sorts of cheap rangefinders from Yashica, Canon, Argus...

My first advice is to break yourself free of a built in light meter. Get some sort of incident meter like a Gossen Digisix to carry in your pocket. This way you can start collecting and using all sorts of old cameras and never worry about a battery again.

I wear eyeglasses and cannot see the 40mm framelines in a Bessa R3A. I cannot see the framelines for 35mm in my M2. I don't find it to be problematic since they are only an estimation anyway. I will never buy a Voigtlander body again after using my Leica. I'm not going to sell you on intangible religious experiences. Just suffice it to say that it works a lot better. It's not clunky, the controls are smooth, and everything is solidly built.

Everyone that has a Voigtlander will chip in to tell you they are nice as well. I agree. The rangefinder and body on my R2x cameras were just as nice. It's the crappy plastic guts and broken shutters and frame skipping problems I'm not willing to deal with when paying 500+ dollars for a NEW camera. My M2 hasnt' been CLAed since 1971 and it works perfectly. I have shot well over 100 rolls of film through it wihout a hiccup and EVERY single photo is perfectly spaced with the sprocket holes so you can cut the film and never cut into a sprocket hole.

So the question is which one do you want? I like my M2. I wouldn't give it up. I shot someone's M6 classic and it felt clunkier. Since I don't care about light metering in the camera I'm as happy as a pig in mud. If you can get yourself over that hurdle, I think you'd love an M3 or M2. I prefer the framelines offered by the M2.

These cameras are a pain in the butt to load compared to something like a Canonet If it's night and it's cold, I take up to 5 minutes to change film in my M2. On a sunny 70 degree day it takes maybe 30 seconds.

I forgot to mention that I paid half what I paid for my R2A for my M2.. that was what got me into the Leica stuff, but now I probably won't go the other way on bodies. The LENSES Voigtlander makes are great and a bargain.

 

[Eric Rose]

If you are a serious shooter look for an M5. It was designed for photographers not collectors and dilettantes. It has a wicked spot meter, you can change shutter speeds and view the results in the viewfinder without taking your eye away from the viewfinder. Last fully mechanical hand made (by Leica) camera they made. I have both an M3 and M5. The M3 is a bit smaller but best used as a shoot from the hip street machine. You can also use the M5 to block a tire so your car doesn't roll down a hill LOL. I use 35mm, 50mm and 90mm lenses on my Leica's.

I too wear glasses and have found that I have to paste rubber washers onto the eyepieces so I don't scratch my glasses.

 

[darkosaric]

I got leica M6 and summicron 50 couple of weeks ago (M6 looks to me like right choice between age and price). Before I was using nikon F3 and F801s most of the time. So far I got disappointed only by framelines that are not precise - specially on infinity (on negative you get more than shown on framelines). Loading film is not a big problem. Summicron in comparing with nikkor (my favorite nikkors are 50mm, 105 and 200) - it is different, wide open (f2 and 2.8) much better, I don't mean in sharpens (don't care so much about this), but in complete look of final print (I shoot only B&W btw). Stopped on f5.6 - 8: I don't see difference comparing to nikkor. But for street and people - much easier than nikons - people are not scared / intimidated of leica like they are of nikons .

 

[Joachim_I]

There are five Ms with built-in meter: M5, M6, M6TTL, M7, MP. I always would go for one of those. The M5 is bigger than all other Ms which makes it less popular. Personally, I am more concerned about the battery type the M5 uses, which is out of production. There are some (relatively expensive) alternatives, however. Also, it is very likely that a camera as old as the M5 needs immediate service. The M6 is smaller. Early M6 are now 25 years old and could need a service as well. The M6TTL is slightly taller than the M6 and adds TTL flash. The M7 is a M6TTL with aperture priority. The MP is a M6 with some modest internal and external changes. Note: Leica changed the direction of the exposure time wheel for the M6TTL, M7 and later digital cameras. It is probably more intuitive but difficult to accept for those who are used to the original turning direction. From this bunch, I would recommend a M6 if you are on a budget or an MP if you can afford it. But that's really personal taste.

If you don't need a built-in meter, it depends on your lens choice. The M4-P (like the M6, M6TTL, M7 and MP with 0.72 magnification) has viewfinder frame lines for 28-135mm, the M4 (like the M5 and M4-2) for 35-135mm, the M2 for 35-90mm and the M3 for 50-135mm. I would count in a service for all of these earlier cameras. The M2 is my favourite among these oldtimers.

 

[Paul Goutiere]

If it has a "dot" make darned certain it is the correct colour. And we all know what the correct colour "dot" is; Right?

 

[Eric Rose]

There are five Ms with built-in meter: M5, M6, M6TTL, M7, MP. I always would go for one of those. The M5 is bigger than all other Ms which makes it less popular. Personally, I am more concerned about the battery type the M5 uses, which is out of production. There are some (relatively expensive) alternatives, however.

This is a total red herring since any competent camera repair person can adjust the meter to take new batteries. All older cameras and especially Leica's need CLA's. Their rangefinders are notorious for going out of alignment if the camera is getting hard use.

The M5 is the only M with a spot meter. The M5 and the M4-P were designed for working professionals. They had better guts in them than the rest.

The thing to do is go down to a camera store and hope they have a few different models. Fondle them and see which one speaks to you.

 

[clayne]

If you don't need a built-in meter, it depends on your lens choice. The M4-P (like the M6, M6TTL, M7 and MP with 0.72 magnification) has viewfinder frame lines for 28-135mm, the M4 (like the M5 and M4-2) for 35-135mm, the M2 for 35-90mm and the M3 for 50-135mm. I would count in a service for all of these earlier cameras. The M2 is my favourite among these oldtimers.

The meter *also* increases the size of the body. Everything from the M5 onwards is vertically taller than M4, M3, M2, etc. Forget about the meter. Use a handheld spot, and combine it with Sunny/16 like rules to be in the ballpark.

 

[Tim Gray]

The meter *also* increases the size of the body. Everything from the M5 onwards is vertically taller than M4, M3, M2, etc. Forget about the meter. Use a handheld spot, and combine it with Sunny/16 like rules to be in the ballpark.

The M6 is the same size as the M4, M3, and M2. The M6TTL and M7 are slightly larger - 3mm taller?

 

[removed account4]

i have a m3 ds and a few lenses. i have never used or held
any other leica. whichever one you decide on, you won't be sorry.
the only drawback is the way it is loaded, but once you do it a few times
you get used to it ...

enjoy !

john

ps garry used a m4

 

[canuhead]

I've only ever used M4-P's, M6's and an MP. I'd suggest the M6 is probably the best bet right now. They're affordable used and they're tough (at least my classics were) and for some, the meter is invaluable. Having said that, my main user is an MP. Feels much smoother but that's not a reason to skip the M6. For the price of a used MP you can get an M6 and some lenses.

 

[Lee L]

The M5 is the only M with a spot meter. The M5 and the M4-P were designed for working professionals.

M6 and M7 both meter off a 12mm diameter central spot on the front shutter curtain, similar to the M5 and the CL (at 7mm), just without the 'semaphore' meter arm.

Are you inferring that Leicas other than the M4-P and M5 weren't designed and built for working professionals? Designs differed, but it's unreasonable and disingenuous to argue that other M series bodies aren't up to daily professional use.

Lee

 

[Joachim_I]

The meter *also* increases the size of the body. Everything from the M5 onwards is vertically taller than M4, M3, M2, etc.

This is simply not true. M6 and MP are as tall as the cameras you mentioned.

 

[Joachim_I]

This is a total red herring since any competent camera repair person can adjust the meter to take new batteries.

They do it for free? If not, my comment is not a "red herring".

 

[Joachim_I]

If you are a serious shooter look for an M5. It was designed for photographers not collectors and dilettantes.

Sure, all the other Leica photographers are not serious and dilettantes :rolleyes:

 

[Ian David]

I use an M6 with a 35. I mostly wear glasses and can still see the framelines OK, but I am not afraid to push my glasses hard up against the viewfinder (which has a rubber lip). An MP would be nice, but the M6/35 combo is a pleasure to use.

Ian

 

[Vilk]

I know a Leica owner who says that a Leica is a lifetime investment.

Oh ya, you'll keep investing for the rest of your life!

Trying to shoehorn the 35 on an M3 you will kill the best feature of the M3--its finder. So if 35 it is, get anything but the M3. Buying a newer camera may dilute the need for that "lifetime investment" initially; a 50-year-old machine will go out of whack more frequently. I wouldn't quote film loading as a factor for any M; I regularly reload on the go... Having said that, I pack an F2 much more often.

You have seen all the best-M-ever threads on RFF, right?

PS. So, did you say "winder" or did you say "quiet"?

 

[Eric Rose]

As I said "If you are a serious shooter look for an M5. It was designed for photographers not collectors and dilettantes."

Photographers - most of us here
Collectors - those that buy and never use
Dilettantes - those that buy them just as jewelery and status.

When I was shooting professionally I probably went through more film in a week than most APUG'rs do in a year so I know something about what a pro level camera should do. That's not meant as a slight on our general membership here as the average APUG'r is much more passionate about their art than a working professional.

 

[canuhead]

I honestly can't see putting an M4-P ahead of an M6, it wasn't any more durable imo and in the relatively short time I've had my MP ( couple of years), I'd put that at the head of the class.

 

[2F/2F]

Easy! M2!

IMO, it is the most camera for the least money in a Leica M. Has a viewfinder for a 35mm lens. It's simple. It is all you need if 35mm is the widest lens you will use.

I agree that the M5 is perhaps the best all-around user camera of the bunch, but the problem with them is that they are not cheap. Not enough better than an M2 to warrant the price difference, IMO.