Which Leica M?

[Eric Rose]

Following that line of thought:

Nikon N75
Nikon F100
Hasselblad 503 CX
Hasselblad 903 SWC
4x5 Pacemaker Speed Graphic
​

Steve

Good on ya Steve.

 

[Sirius Glass]

All your going to get is "use the one I have" type of answers to such a vague question.

Following that line of thought:

Nikon N75
Nikon F100
Hasselblad 503 CX
Hasselblad 903 SWC
4x5 Pacemaker Speed Graphic
​

Steve

Good on ya Steve.

I have your back Eric!

Steve

 

[mhcfires]

I prefer the M2. I use mostly 35 or 50, so it was the one for me. Needs no batteries, don't mind the rewind knob. The M6 and MP were way out of my budget. I'll save for a summilux 35.

 

[2F/2F]

Easy answer for me. There are only two Leica M cameras that I actually really, really like a whole lot: The M3 and the M2. I would probably pick an M2 if I had a choice between the two, just because I'd prefer its wider-angle viewfinder, and its set of frame lines. This viewfinder and frame line set fits my use of a small format rangefinder a bit better than the ones on the M3.

...and when I pick the M2, it will be one with no self timer and a button rewind: the simplest and cleanest of the M2s...and my lens set will be exactly what the camera is designed for: 35, 50, 90.

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

If you like 35mm FL lenses, then the M3 is a bad choice...

 

[Q.G.]

Why so few recommendations for the M4-P?

 

[mablo]

Why so few recommendations for the M4-P?

I've got one but I wouldn't describe it as "the one Leica M everyone should get". It's the last meterless M-body, very reliable but also a bit archaic. If I had more dough in my pockets I'd get the M6 TTL not because of the TTL-flash but because the viewfinder with < o > leds and the shutter speed dial turning in the right direction.

 

[Vincenzo Maielli]

I own Leica M2, M3, M4, M5, M7, MP and CL, all i use in various circumstances. For an actual use, maybe, is important prefer a model with built in light meter.
Ciao.
Vincenzo

 

[perkeleellinen]

I've got an M4-P and I think if I had the money spare, I'd like to trade it for an M6 to get an internal meter. But I doubt if that will ever happen given the prices.

 

[lns]

Money no object: MP.

Money an object, but meterless okay: M3 or M2.

Money an object, but want meter: Zeiss Ikon.

The only Leica I don't like after using it is the M6. For its viewfinder, which flared too much for my uses, though others don't mind, so that's personal. And the only Leica I'd never be tempted by is the M5, for the totally personal and admittedly indefensible reason that I think it's unattractive.

-Laura

 

[illumiquest]

M2, 35mm framelines, excellent build and they're cheaper than dirt right now. The M3 is fine but who wants to be restricted to 5omm? All a camera is is a box to hold a lens so why spend a ton on an M6 or MP? Yes, a meter would be nice but you can get a cold shoe one for 100$

 

[Jon Butler]

I've used M's since 1959 it was used M3 I was 15, in fact I've still got it and it's never had a service but keeps on going.
Since then I've had every model produced except M6TTL but do have a M7 and an MP if I could only keep one it would
the M6 Classic. I rarely use 35mm these days as I use a Mamiya 7 for hand held stuff and 4x5 as my main outfit.
I am sure I'll go back to the Leica's one day soon.
JON.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I will take any of them, M3 will be great. I'm just dreaming!

Jeff

 

[cbphoto]

M2. Best finder I've seen.

 

[Bateleur]

Okay, I'll bite. Because that question can have as many answers and opinions as there are people here, but: I chose an M6 Classic because -

1. It has a good meter. Some may disagree, but I think it's fine. Actually, I think it's excellent for the kind of work I do. (I'm not a 35mm zoner)

2. It is still a completely mechanical camera, ultimately an M4 with a meter. M4 would have been my first choice, but after having done some research and considering the similar cost of an M4, I like the bonus of not having to estimate exposure or tolerate an awkward little hotshoe meter. I like that if batteries go out, I don't have to stop shooting.

3. MP is very expensive and I think I'd hesitate to use it and treat it the way I do my M6.

4. The M6 I have has the MP VF mod ($250 I'm told) and while I can't directly compare to one without, I think it's probably a significant improvement and one of the reasons to choose over the MP itself.

5. M3 would be nice, but I like black and black paint would be prohibitively expensive, more a collector piece than a user and again, no meter. If in-camera metering REALLY isn't important to you, than M3 or even M2 might be a nice choice.

6. Not specific to M6, or maybe even Leica, but I love shooting film with a completely manual camera. I think it was Mike Johnston (and I'm sure many others) has said: It has everything I need and nothing I don't to make pictures.

SNIP ...

Best of luck to you!

Andrew, I agree wholeheartedly with this posting, good used M6's abound and can be picked up for a good price and I would like to add that the finder issue on the M6 is annoying, the upgrade is worth the extra expense.

 

[AgentX]

I have an M3 and love the finder, but carrying and using the 35mm with the goggles kind of sucks. Mine make it marginally darker and harder to see (although the framelines are more visible while wearing glasses than the M2 without goggles, I'll give it that...)

Thus, I'd prefer to own an M2 (and a non-goggle lens), since the 35mm and 50mm are mostly what I use, and the 90mm finder will do for my rare occasions I want the longer lens.

Rewind crank vs. knob isn't an issue to me, like I thought it would be, and frankly all Leicas are a pain in the ass to reload when you're in a hurry; the rewind is the least cumbersome step regardless. (when rewinding, I tend to hold the knob and rotate the camera around it--works much more quickly for me than holding the camera and spinning the tiny knob...)

Since I use an external meter, the M2 or M3 are great for me. If I used a wider range of lenses, I'd consider the M4-2, and if I needed a meter, I'd go for an M6...if I used flash a lot, the M6 TTL.

 

[eddym]

Rewind crank vs. knob isn't an issue to me, like I thought it would be, and frankly all Leicas are a pain in the ass to reload when you're in a hurry; the rewind is the least cumbersome step regardless.

Not true. I can unload and reload my M6 and M4-2 very quickly, at least as fast as any 35mm slr. I've never timed myself, but it's a matter of seconds. Definitely less than a minute.
The M3 with the old style takeup spool does take more time, yes. But it's still not that bad.

 

[AgentX]

Not true. I can unload and reload my M6 and M4-2 very quickly, at least as fast as any 35mm slr. I've never timed myself, but it's a matter of seconds. Definitely less than a minute.
The M3 with the old style takeup spool does take more time, yes. But it's still not that bad.

I'm sure that you can load a Leica very quickly. But it's demonstrable that loading a Leica takes more individual movements than any standard modern (and virtually all classic) SLR, and that some of these movements are extremely fine-motor skill actions, moreso than with an SLR.

Therefore, if you practiced with an SLR as much as you've obviously practiced with your Lecia, and could perform the fewer actions at around the same speed (yes, each action takes a differing amount of time, but the actions on an SLR are generally simpler...) you'd absolutely have to be faster than you are with a Leica.

So though you personally may be able to load a Leica faster than you load an SLR, because you've practiced more, or load your Leica faster than I can load my SLR, the Leica is still slower with all other things being equal.

This is not to mention the fact that handling the Leica requires juggling several detached pieces during the loading process, and that fumbling one (under stress, especially, as a photojournalist might face while working) can then require finding and cleaning the piece, or suffering the total loss of the working camera until a replacement is procured. (Or being forced to carry spare baseplates and takeup reels, which still lose time for you while fishing them out...not to mention the cost and inability to procure more backups while working in the field...)

It's roughly equivalent to reloading a revolver vs. an automatic pistol, which is something I'm professionally intimate with. Some people insist that just because a particular pistol-gaming shooter can reload a revolver in 2.1 seconds, a revolver is "just as fast or faster" than an automatic. Simply not the case, and certainly not in the stress of a firefight...again, requires more numerous, more precise fine-motor movements. And loss of fine-motor control is the first thing to happen to the body under stress or excitement.


Edit to add: In any case, the worst I've had to deal with reloading a Leica was shooting for pleasure atop Kilimanjaro in the cold and thin air, and I did just fine, albiet pretty slowly...I really don't think we're adding anything to the OP's question...I'd still recommend an M2 or M3 depending on his lens preferences...

 

[fotch]

..........This is not to mention the fact that handling the Leica requires juggling several detached pieces during the loading process, and that fumbling one (under stress, especially, as a photojournalist might face while working) can then require finding and cleaning the piece, or suffering the total loss of the working camera until a replacement is procured. (Or being forced to carry spare baseplates and takeup reels, which still lose time for you while fishing them out...not to mention the cost and inability to procure more backups while working in the field...)............

Your kidding, right? I always heard that the Leica was pretty popular with journalist. Maybe I am wrong but I think you kind of overstated the problem. JMHO

 

[BetterSense]

I'm not familiar with Leicas; can someone explain to me how you reload them, and why it's different than Japanese SLRs? I'm trying to imagine any other loading scheme and having a hard time understanding how it could be that different.

 

[AgentX]

I'm not familiar with Leicas; can someone explain to me how you reload them, and why it's different than Japanese SLRs? I'm trying to imagine any other loading scheme and having a hard time understanding how it could be that different.

You load a Leica by entirely removing the bottom plate (via a turning a tab that folds out from the base), removing/stowing the rewound cannister, partially inserting a new cannister and pulling out some film tongue, pulling the takeup reel out of the camera from the bottom, attaching the film tongue, opening a back viewing door to expose the film track, sticking the cannister and takeup spool (now connected) back into the camera, moving the wind lever to take up slack and ensure the feed sprockets are engaged, then closing the back and re-attaching the bottom.

Thus in all, you're juggling the camera, bottom plate, takeup reel, spent cannister, and fresh cannister. Not that someone familiar with the process doesn't have a system down for dealing with this...just pointing out the parts involved to deal with, and how it's much more cumbersome than your average SLR.


Fotch, photojournalists dedicated to the Leica worked around the awkward reload quite well. That doesn't mean it's not awkward; it just means they were dedicated and practiced a lot, along with carrying spare baseplates and takeup reels. (and, I'm guessing for most, keeping multiple cameras loaded at all times, like photojournalists with many different makes and models did.)

Edit: I've also never reloaded a more modern Leica than the M3. Frankly wasn't aware they had different takeup spools. But they still load through the bottom.

However, the OP wants a Leica--let's get back to recommending him one. My intent was not to disturb the faithful.

 

[kalye]

dear OP,

I would recommend a Leica M6 classic. There's a lot of them going around(B&H, KEH, craigslist). For the M6, you may want to take into consideration the different viewfinder sizes (.58, .72, and .85). .72 seems to be the most common. You might need to spend extra for a CLA if the camera is not in good condition.

 

[clayne]

Edit: I've also never reloaded a more modern Leica than the M3. Frankly wasn't aware they had different takeup spools. But they still load through the bottom.

It's significant enough that your statement doesn't really apply to anyone using a modern M for journalist purposes. Any M past, and including, the M4 will load fast with only a temporary spot, like a pocket, needed for the bottom plate.

 

[AgentX]

Well, again, this thread is about what Leica to recommend--someone took a passing comment about Leicas in general being a pain in the ass to load (which they are, compared to SLRs) and it spiralled from there.

My only point in making the comment was that the rewind style of any particular Leica model isn't too big of a deal, so the OP shouldn't be hung up on getting one with a rewind crank instead of a knob, or vice-versa. There are things that matter far more for most of us...I doubt many of us as amateurs will be using the cameras in situations where either loading or rewinding is critically important, or where we lose a baseplate as we try to reload the camera under mortar fire.

The viewfinder, I think, is issue #1, and the decision of which Leica model to go with should be made based on the lenses one plans to use. In general, I'd recommend the simpler M2 or M3 finder (fewer extraneous framelines) if the shooter only plans on using the moderate, classic focal lengths, or has a love of accessory viewfinders. If not, there are many more variables to consider.

 

[mhcfires]

It is a PITA to reload, but reloading an M is a piece of cake next to reloading my IIIa or IIIf, and even then I have managed to reload them fairly quickly. I can reload my M2 in less than a minute, it probably takes about two minutes or so to reload the LTM Leicas.