M7 Discontinued by Leica

[Arklatexian]

The film resurgence could not save the M7.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/9619099508/leica-m7-film-camera-comes-to-an-end

Yes, I guess the M7 was a failure having been manufactured only 2 to 3 years longer than the M3, my point being that Leica production runs seem to have usually been in the 10-16 year range so this was probably anticipated and "no", I don't think any electronic camera equals the longevity of an all mechanical M3, but I am stuck in the past according to some, and according to me, "will stay there"............Regards!

 

[blockend]

I saw a couple in CVS the other day. I think they were Fuji. I don't know how long they have been on the shelf. Probably not flying off.

Google says Ilford, Agfaphoto and Fuji are still selling single use film cameras.

 

[hacked - sepiareverb]

... finding a purchase that both represents the breed iconically and serves as a historical marker in the life of the series is important to ground the purchase in history...

At the cost of usability, sensible. The iconic history of the M is certainly not why I shoot with one. It is the magnificent lenses available, which the M3 only makes more difficult. But to each his own.

 

[Arklatexian]

I am still working on convincing myself to buy a used Leica so I cannot even start the conversation about buying a new one. but I am sorry to see another camera company cutting back on film camera production.

It is my belief that most Leica owners in the last 80 years have been owners of preowned (used) equipment. There are many people in this world who can easily afford Leica prices and bless them, those interested in photography, paid those prices, because they, for the most part, are where the used cameras that I own came from. I don't think this is true in countries other than the USA because Leica USA always had a problem believing their dealers regarding adapters to allow screw mount lenses to be used on new bayonet mount cameras. In other countries, people did not trade cameras as much. That was during the so-called "golden" age of film photography. Hopefully those people still exist. Folks like most of us never were able to buy new Leica equipment. So Sirius, do like the rest of us do, buy used, even though, taking in consideration inflation, new Leica prices are less than they have ever been,.......Regards!

 

[Theo Sulphate]

I find the M3 is the worst M body of the lot, except I guess the M1. Worst VF, and most limited for lens compatibility.

Your points are valid, though use of the word "worst" implies the rest are bad (i.e. "the Leica M's are bad, but the M3 is the worst").

Sort of like, the Ferrari 308 is the worst of the lot, except I guess the 348.

 

[AgX]

Are disposables/ single use cameras still made? They were popular as wedding reception freebies until very recently.

Google says Ilford, Agfaphoto and Fuji are still selling single use film cameras.

Still on offer here in different versions.
Kodak Alaris just these days released a new model.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Our obsession and snobbery with "fully manual" is showing again. ...

When the last Contax G2 and Nikon F6 fail and are thrown in the dumpster, I shall photograph that dumpster with my Leica M3 and Nikon F. We win! We win! Ha ha!

(view camera users need not comment)

 

[RattyMouse]

Yes, I guess the M7 was a failure having been manufactured only 2 to 3 years longer than the M3, my point being that Leica production runs seem to have usually been in the 10-16 year range so this was probably anticipated and "no", I don't think any electronic camera equals the longevity of an all mechanical M3, but I am stuck in the past according to some, and according to me, "will stay there"............Regards!

By save I meant the Leica M film line. The film resurgence could not save the next Leica. In every case before the M7, it's discontinuation was followed by the release of a new film camera. Who's thinking that a new film Leica body is coming?

 

[Lachlan Young]

By save I meant the Leica M film line. The film resurgence could not save the next Leica. In every case before the M7, it's discontinuation was followed by the release of a new film camera. Who's thinking that a new film Leica body is coming?

It's the M-A. The biggest problem for Leica is probably the availability of electronic sub-assemblies/ shutters. Eliminate those & it's relatively easier to make smaller batches & get rid of the largest probable source of failure down the line. Leica-fans generally seemed to quite dislike the M7, so its lasting as long as it did is remarkable.

 

[faberryman]

Is the M-P still available or just the M-A?

 

[Arthurwg]

I find the M3 is the worst M body of the lot, except I guess the M1. Worst VF, and most limited for lens compatibility.

Yes, the M3 was not great. I much preferred the M4. But my M6 is wonderful.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Is the M-P still available or just the M-A?

Both are still available - and no indication to the contrary.

 

[mnemosyne]

At the cost of usability, sensible. The iconic history of the M is certainly not why I shoot with one. It is the magnificent lenses available, which the M3 only makes more difficult. But to each his own.

I have to disagree with your sweeping statements regarding the M3 being the worst M viewfinder.

Over the years I had the chance to compare my M3 (DS) to various other M models I have or had in use, including my own M2, my own M4-2 and also an M6 and M7 that were lent to me by friends. My verdict ist that the optical quality and precision of the M3 viewfinder is unsurpassed. It is the easiest to focus and the only model that always maintains a crisp and clear rangefinder patch, no matter how adverse the lighting conditions are. It is also the only viewfinder that allows me to reliably focus f1.4 lenses wide open at close focus, while the hit rate with the smaller magnification viewfinders is more like 5/10. It also is the only viewfinder that allows me to have both eyes open while framing/shooting, which can help a great deal when composing a dynamic scene with objects moving in/out of the frame. For someone like me who uses the 50mm lens most of the time, an M3 is the logical choice. 50mm is the classical rangefinder focal length and is also the focal length with the most interesting line up of lenses. For the rare instances where I want to use a 35mm or wider lens, I can easily add an external viewfinder or with some experiene, simply guess the 35mm field. It works well enough. Of course, if you shoot a 35mm lens most of the time, I would agree that the M3 isn't the best choice. For everyone else I would recommend to look through the viewfinder of a M3 only once in their lifetime and come to their own conclusions

 

[larfe]

I have to disagree with your sweeping statements regarding the M3 being the worst M viewfinder.

Over the years I had the chance to compare my M3 (DS) to various other M models I have or had in use, including my own M2, my own M4-2 and also an M6 and M7 that were lent to me by friends. My verdict ist that the optical quality and precision of the M3 viewfinder is unsurpassed. It is the easiest to focus and the only model that always maintains a crisp and clear rangefinder patch, no matter how adverse the lighting conditions are. It is also the only viewfinder that allows me to reliably focus f1.4 lenses wide open at close focus, while the hit rate with the smaller magnification viewfinders is more like 5/10. It also is the only viewfinder that allows me to have both eyes open while framing/shooting, which can help a great deal when composing a dynamic scene with objects moving in/out of the frame. For someone like me who uses the 50mm lens most of the time, an M3 is the logical choice. 50mm is the classical rangefinder focal length and is also the focal length with the most interesting line up of lenses. For the rare instances where I want to use a 35mm or wider lens, I can easily add an external viewfinder or with some experiene, simply guess the 35mm field. It works well enough. Of course, if you shoot a 35mm lens most of the time, I would agree that the M3 isn't the best choice. For everyone else I would recommend to look through the viewfinder of a M3 only once in their lifetime and come to their own conclusions

How the M3's VF will allow one to reliably and precisely focus an f1.4 lens wide open at close focus (err is that 1 metre?) but how the 35mm FOV can be guessed if needed, to mention both these things in the same paragraph is quite remarkable...

 

[mnemosyne]

How the M3's VF will allow one to reliably and precisely focus an f1.4 lens wide open at close focus (err is that 1 metre?) but how the 35mm FOV can be guessed if needed, to mention both these things in the same paragraph is quite remarkable...

Reading your statement I wonder if you have ever acutally used a rangefinder camera.

Framing with rangefinder cameras is never precise. This is a consequence of the RF camera design. The framelines you see in the viewfinder are always an approximization of what you will get on film. Precise framing is not a particular strength the of RF cameras. Precise focusing is (or at least should be).

Estimating (in the above sense) a 35mm FOV is something that can be learned with a bit of experience, precisely focusig a 50mm lens at f1.4 and close distance by guessing is not.

A slightly misframed shot with a 35mm lens is probably still usable, a portrait that is focused on your girlfriends neck instead of her eyes is not.

 

[Huss]

I use my M3 with a goggled Summaron 35, and it works great. Brie Larson copied my get up - even down to the brown leather on the camera body - and she survived Kong Island! So the M3 must be the best...

 

[TheRook]

Are disposables/ single use cameras still made? They were popular as wedding reception freebies until very recently.

Oh, absolutely. In some developing countries where many homes are not supplied with electric power, disposable cameras are still quite popular, as there is no need for the user to have direct access to a power source to charge the camera in order to take pictures.

 

[RattyMouse]

Oh, absolutely. In some developing countries where many homes are not supplied with electric power, disposable cameras are still quite popular, as there is no need for the user to have direct access to a power source to charge the camera in order to take pictures.

I seriously doubt anyone poor enough to live without power are buying cameras of any kind.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Are disposables/ single use cameras still made? They were popular as wedding reception freebies until very recently.

Amazingly, I see disposable cameras in stores everywhere. There really is a market for them: A car-club friend of mine, who is phobic of any technology or mechanical device, buys them as the easiest and least effort-of-mind way of making photos. He buys it, presses the button, returns it for processing, and has prints a week later.

Oddly, his photos are pretty good in terms of subject and composition.

 

[TheRook]

I seriously doubt anyone poor enough to live without power are buying cameras of any kind.

You are looking at it from an industrial nation perspective. It's not so much about poverty. There are countless villages in remote areas in developing countries which simply lack electric power infrastructure. Not everyone in the village may be so poor as not to be able to purchase a disposable camera to capture special occasions, such as weddings and family gatherings. Regardless how many goats you own, how successful your yam crop yield is, how much money you have saved up, if there isn't a power supply line leading to your home because the infrastructure doesn't exist, a digital camera with its constant need for recharging is simply useless. In such a situation, the disposable camera will be the only option for picture taking.

 

[Rob Skeoch]

Thought I would chirp in here.
I'm on my fifth M6, (they get stolen and fall in rivers over the years), but have switched to the MP because I find it better. So currently I have two bodies the M6 and MP.
In theory I don't like the M7 because of the automation, or specifically the Aperture Priority mode. However, there are a lot of days when it would be great to have that very same mode. A lot of days actually.
The other thing I don't like about them is the black chrome finish, similar to the M6. Times have changed, people didn't originally like the black paint on brass cameras because they looked old after a few years of use... so Leica came out with the black chrome. Now people want the brassing on the painted cameras because it makes them look used. Which is a nice look and makes it appear like you really use the camera even though you just sanded off the corners with sand paper.

 

[mshchem]

Thought I would chirp in here.
I'm on my fifth M6, (they get stolen and fall in rivers over the years), but have switched to the MP because I find it better. So currently I have two bodies the M6 and MP.
In theory I don't like the M7 because of the automation, or specifically the Aperture Priority mode. However, there are a lot of days when it would be great to have that very same mode. A lot of days actually.
The other thing I don't like about them is the black chrome finish, similar to the M6. Times have changed, people didn't originally like the black paint on brass cameras because they looked old after a few years of use... so Leica came out with the black chrome. Now people want the brassing on the painted cameras because it makes them look used. Which is a nice look and makes it appear like you really use the camera even though you just sanded off the corners with sand paper.

Rivers? Did you fish them out?
I had a M6ttl in black chrome w 0.72x finder. I sold it in a moment of temporary insanity. Recently I purchased a still new in box 0.85x M6ttl chrome, love the finder. I've not the money for a new MP, (right now) they sure are pretty.