View Full Version : Really close to my first M body
Hi all,
I'm finally flogging some of my 35mm Nikon film gear to enter into the M system.
The choice of M4-P, M6, M7 or MP (drool) is going to be dictated by price.
Likely to be a cheaper one to begin with, and 50 Summicron (newer type)
What do you folks think to this.......
http://www.reddotcameras.co.uk/product_info.php?cPath=34_35&products_id=1578&osCsid=e978cc48b2e502ae55b68157935f2ad0
Thanks,
Steve.
Roger Hicks
08-22-2009, 01:46
Dear Steve,
Leave it to a collector. The asterisk bungs up the price and brings no extra functionality.
If you can even begin to afford it, the MP will save time and money in the long run, because you won't have to trade it in.
Or you might persuade me to sell you a VERY well-worn (instant credibility!) M4-P, one owner for 30 years or thereabouts....
Cheers,
R.
Photon42
08-22-2009, 02:27
I can't really comment on M4 prices - never really cared and I don't know the small differences between the various M4 models.
Are you sure you want a camera w/o a light meter? That may be perfectly meaningful, of course. The list of bodies you mention have quite a variation when it comes to light metering. What's about a M6? It has all six frame lines, and a light meter. You can still remove the batteries and pretend it's a M4 :cool:
Chris101
08-22-2009, 03:18
That one is a bit steep. The M4-P is really made for a wide angle anyway. 35mm is ideal for it's viewfinder, and even 28mm works fine. Its 50mm lines look kinda small to me.
I do rather like, however, not having the meter in the camera.
spend a bit less and get M2 or M3 spend a bit more and get a M6. Just my thoughts.
spend a bit less and get M2 or M3 spend a bit more and get a M6. Just my thoughts.
Agree. My suggestion is to get a M6 for the build in meter, especially considering it's ur first M.
Dear All,
Thanks for the useful advice & replies. (This really is the best forum out there).
In an ideal world I would be able to afford an MP.
The way I see it is:
M4-P : Cheap affordable way into the M system. Currently own a handheld meter.
M6 :Built-in meter but purely mechanical if necessary. -Reality - Sensible and fairly affordable option.
M7 :Built-in meter and Ap. priority (What if become lazy and want to point and shoot!)- but the reality is I never just leave it to the meter. Always have a guess first and adjust as I see fit on my Nikon FM3A with its meter.
MP - Pipe dream - One day though.
Thanks,
Any other thoughts are of course always welcome.
Steve.
RFluhver
08-22-2009, 05:35
Agree. My suggestion is to get a M6 for the build in meter, especially considering it's ur first M.
I took the opposing approach when entering into the M system. As far as I was concerned, there was only one way to do it properly: the old fashioned way. No meter! So an M2 it was.
As for questions on focusing and exposure, I am doing my best to learn "sunny 16", zone focusing and hyperfocusing.
Roger Hicks
08-22-2009, 05:42
I took the opposing approach when entering into the M system. As far as I was concerned, there was only one way to do it properly: the old fashioned way. No meter!
Why?
If you want to be old fashioned for the sake of being old-fashioned, what's wrong with quarter plate (3-1/4 x 4-1/4 inch) instead of faffing around with postage-stamp sized formats?
I never owned a metered Leica until the MP. That was because when I started (with a II in 1969), Leicas didn't have meters, and it wasn't until the MP that I could see the point of replacing (or rather, supplementing) the M4-P I bought in the early 80s (I never did like the M5). But there's no inherent merit in having no meter. How could there be?
Cheers,
R.
I am doing my best to learn "sunny 16", zone focusing and hyperfocusing.
I find I use the 'sunny 11 rule' for 100 speed film here in the UK - when the bl**dy sun comes out!
I found that at 1/125 @ F16 kept in the highlights but didn't allow for any reflectance off bright subjects, such as white walls etc, and shadows blocked up completely. So with 1/125 @ F11 the true burnt out highlights become specular, bright subjects with bright light on them are truly bright and shadows open up.
Just a thought.
Steve.
Roger Hicks
08-22-2009, 05:45
I find I use the 'sunny 11 rule' for 100 speed film here in the UK - when the bl**dy sun comes out!
I found that at 1/125 @ F16 kept in the highlights but didn't allow for any reflectance off bright subjects, such as white walls etc, and shadows blocked up completely. So with 1/125 @ F11 the true burnt out highlights become specular, bright subjects with bright light on them are truly bright and shadows open up.
Just a thought.
Steve.
Dear Steve,
I completely agree: sunny 11-1/2 at best.
As for hyperfocal distance (not your post), it seems perverse to me to buy the finest RF cameras in the world and then not use the RF.
Cheers,
R.
I would suggest an M6, that way you have a built-in meter and can leave your handheld meter home:D Anyway, I was in your position once, and I bought an M6.
IMO, an M7 won't make you lazy, you can still use it in manual mode and only use the AE in certain situation where an AE is needed. When or if I buy another M film camera, it will be an M7 for its AE mode because there are times when shooting in manual just too difficult or too slow, like in situations where the light changes quickly.
Bob
Dear Bob,
Thanks for that suggestion. This is what I find myself up against (in my own mind).
Hmmmm.
Steve. ;-)
chrishayton
08-22-2009, 06:13
I have an M4-p which I paid 350 for in very good condition except from a bit of vulcanite missing which I just replaced with griptac) I like the viewfinder with no lights and its as though its just a tool for composing and focusing which is nice and a change from all the info in a DSLR finder.
I currently use a handheld meter and always have great exposures however its a faff carrying it and taking out of the pocket all the time, so just bought a black mr-4 meter off ebay that should speed things up slightly.
Id still go with unmetered leicas if i had a choice due to the clear finder but maybe pick up a vcII (i tried but im not paying £195 for one and rare 2nd hand, vs £50 for the mr4) to clip on top. Its also easier to ignore the meter that way
Theres also a premium on the m6 over the m4-p for the meter which apart from that its essentially the same camera
As your in the uk check out real camera company in manchester, brilliant cameras and prices and excellent service, Check their website for info and ring them to see what stock they have. They are all leica fans so will give you honest and knowledgeable advice.
35mmdelux
08-22-2009, 06:32
Theres also a premium on the m6 over the m4-p for the meter which apart from that its essentially the same camera
Point well made. Still, I prefer the integrated meter, hence my M7/MP. Speeds things up ALOT. I use handheld meter for portraits mostly.
I prefer an integrated meter too and think they help shooters work quickly, when they are not experts in using the Mk I Eyeball Meter. Hand helds are great for some tasks but are not as quick as n integral meter if you are not in the same light as your subject. Reflected is useful but not always that quick to interpret.
My advice, if money is an issue, is a late model 0.72 M6 classic. Good prices, good build, low mileage for many and a classic camera. Although the MP feels a touch heavier and you get better finishes, the M6 is a great shooter.
I will recommend you persevere with Red dot. I have dealt with Ivor a fair amount and he has some used bodies in for good prices, but not on everything. You should be able to get a E++/mint classic for 699/750 from him. He gives a full 6 month warranty and does not bleat if there are issues. I will always drop in when I am in London! If you let him know what you want he might let you know when he has it in.
I use my M7 mostly in AE mode (daytime) and with an external meter (night time) or the M4-P with either the MR-4 or Seconic L208. Except for the M5 with the speed indicator in the VF and large shutter dial, I can't see any advantage of the TTL metering (except for filter or TTL-flash).
Why?
If you want to be old fashioned for the sake of being old-fashioned, what's wrong with quarter plate (3-1/4 x 4-1/4 inch) instead of faffing around with postage-stamp sized formats?
I never owned a metered Leica until the MP. That was because when I started (with a II in 1969), Leicas didn't have meters, and it wasn't until the MP that I could see the point of replacing (or rather, supplementing) the M4-P I bought in the early 80s (I never did like the M5). But there's no inherent merit in having no meter. How could there be?
Cheers,
R.
Respectfully disagree. I learnt to shoot first with a Leica IIIC that was of course unmetered and I didn't get any additional lightmeter like a VC or sekonic. Then I moved onto a Leica M2 - a great camera that I picked up at a fraction for the price of a metered M6/M7/MP. It is actually one of the best ways to learn to shoot.
Traded those for a CLE, damaged that then I got a Leica M6. I found that I was making better exposures with my M2 than with the CLE/M6. It forces you to concentrate. The M2 is a great camera.
See Mr Hicks, your posts in this thread are contradictory and I don't understand why you would want to sell the original author your M4P as that runs contrary to everything that you have said above. Because, the M4P is one of those in-between M cameras, unmetered, but lacking the classical finish and super smooth mechanics of the earlier M3, M2, M4.
Following your philosophy, if you are going to be old fashioned for the sake of old fashioned, then 'one' would make sure you do it properly, with one of the three original earlier Ms, not that displaced brother that you were trying unload to the OP.
If you are going to shoot a classic camera, don't pull up short with the unmetered M4P when you could find a good user unmetered M3,M2,M4 and stroke some history in the bargain. My advice would be to get one of these three or an M6 classic. You can later upgrade to an MP if you feel the urge.
thomasw_
08-22-2009, 22:10
OP:>
If you going to start building your M kit with a 50mm lens, which is a great way to roll, then I'd recommend a M3 to start. There is no better viewfinder in the M system for a 50. I shoot with a MP 0.85x and it is a superb VF, but it is a VF allowing the 35 brightlines, and so it is just a tiny bit of a compromise in magnification for the 50/75 and longer FLs. The M3 is as good as it gets for shooting a 50, especially in low light.
Whether metered or not, choose the best VF for your use; that will determine which M to obtain.
i would take the opportunity to pick up an m4 or mp for the lowest prices we've seen in several years.
telenous
08-22-2009, 22:57
What do you folks think to this.......
http://www.reddotcameras.co.uk/product_info.php?cPath=34_35&products_id=1578&osCsid=e978cc48b2e502ae55b68157935f2ad0
Hi Steve,
Very briefly, one thing I noticed on the asterisked camera you provided a link for: the camera has an early S/N (because it carries the S/N of the camera it replaced) but it has flush viewfinder and rangefinder windows, which usually signals it carries all the changes implemented on late production run M4-Ps: different framelines and zinc top plate. Similar to an M6 but without the meter. AFAIK the price is pretty much what these cameras go for in UK second hand stores. Good luck with your choice.
.
Roger Hicks
08-23-2009, 01:30
. . . a Leica M2 - a great camera that I picked up at a fraction for the price of a metered M6/M7/MP. It is actually one of the best ways to learn to shoot.
Why? I increasingly suspect that this is an empty article of faith for those of us who started out that way. Why should hit-or-miss exposure (or using a separate meter) be even a good way to learn to shoot, let alone one of the best ways?
The point about selling the M4-P was principally a joke: some people like their cameras to look as if they have been used hard, and this one has.
Cheers,
R.
Why? I increasingly suspect that this is an empty article of faith for those of us who started out that way. Why should hit-or-miss exposure (or using a separate meter) be even a good way to learn to shoot, let alone one of the best ways?
The point about selling the M4-P was principally a joke: some people like their cameras to look as if they have been used hard, and this one has.
Cheers,
R.
In my case the absence of meter/arrows/lights/electronics forced me to slow down, pay more attention to existing light conditions. Recording the light conditions on a notepad, recording exposure and testing from there in the darkroon. Granted it is a lot slower and more time consuming than metered shooting when you are starting out, but it is more beneficial in the long run.
Besides, one may wonder why this 'empty article of faith' that you allude to has only recently aroused your suspicions? For an experienced photographer with a long history in the medium, why is this such a recent revelation?
I guess one could put it down to the recent internet invasion with every photog and their opinion. I assume that scenario wasn't as evident before with only the print medium of magazines and books to communicate ideas.
Back to the topic. To the original OP, I doubt that you would regret getting a good condition M3,M2, or M4. Once you get one you will see what all the fuss is about. Get the M3 if you want to concentrate on the 50mm lens, get the M2 if you want to get the 35mm lens or get the M4 for the best of both worlds. One could argue that the camera is merely a lightbox for capturing images and the M4P would then suit your needs. However, if you want to feel and enjoy every inflection of the camera then you won't regret one of those originals. The actual act of taking the photograph is heightened. But, each to his own.
nobbylon
08-23-2009, 02:33
Simple choice, go for an M6 if you want a meter and if you don't need one go for an M2, 3 or 4 depending on which viewfinder you like. I've had an MP and IMHO contrary to the MP lover's and luster's association's thoughts found it to be an overpriced, metered mix of all. Yes it's the newest variant, yes it's nice looking but the fact is if you don't need a meter you are not actually getting anything above an M2 apart from a later camera with a slightly brighter viewfinder. I sold my M6's after I started on the M2 and M4 route and these camera's to me just feel nicer to use than anything else. Of course if you are wealthy enough to afford an MP then yes I would get that but if not go with the choices above and spend the left over on some decent glass. I sold my MP purely because it did nothing that I couldn't do with an M2 and used the extra cash to buy other gear.
Ps. I prefer USING my D700 to all of the above but will concede that from time to time the images from my summicrons and elmars are nicer to look at. But then I love the pics that I shot with my Spotmatic and 50 1.4 tak. You can't win with choices, there's always something that one camera or lens does better than another. The trick I've tried to learn is picking up the camera and lens combo to achieve the look YOU want the final result to have. Good luck with your choices.
Roger Hicks
08-23-2009, 02:51
In my case the absence of meter/arrows/lights/electronics forced me to slow down, pay more attention to existing light conditions. Recording the light conditions on a notepad, recording exposure and testing from there in the darkroon. Granted it is a lot slower and more time consuming than metered shooting when you are starting out, but it is more beneficial in the long run.
Besides, one may wonder why this 'empty article of faith' that you allude to has only recently aroused your suspicions? For an experienced photographer with a long history in the medium, why is this such a recent revelation?
I guess one could put it down to the recent internet invasion with every photog and their opinion. I assume that scenario wasn't as evident before with only the print medium of magazines and books to communicate ideas.
Notebooks? No thanks! The chances of finding exactly the same subject under exactly the same light are negligible. Besides, I'd rather take pictures than fill in blanks in a notebook.
My suspicion is not recent: it's been growing for a decade or more. It was fed by a simple observation. Give someone an automatic camera and they concentrate on pictures. They can then find out about technique later, when their pictures aren't as good technically as they would like. Give them a manual camera and there is so much more to think about that they may not get even half-decent pictures.
Twenty years ago, good auto cameras were a lot rarer and more expensive, and people did indeed get interested in darkroom work quite quickly. Over forty years ago, when I started, 'serious amateurs' shot mostly B+W or slides.
Nowadays, automatic cameras (including digital) are absurdly cheap and mostly deliver very good results, and hardly anyone works in the darkroom. What I believed 40, 30 or even 20 years ago is not necessarily what I believe now.
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
08-23-2009, 03:00
A further thought. We all like to think that our hard-won expertise is special. It's not. Taking pictures is special. The object of photography is to take pictures, not to purify the soul through suffering. The trick is to find the route that gives you the best pictures, soonest. For some this is a long road leading to 10x12 inch contact prints. For others, it's the 'A' on the dial of an M7 or M8. And those are only two of the possibilities.
Cheers,
R.
Jaans, A lot of what you state below is even more lade with personal bent than what Roger said. Some comments:
Learning the light is learning the light, whether the meter is in the camera or hand held. Sure, I own un-metered bodies as well as metered, but the simple fact is that metered cameras have certain advantages. You can always use a hand held meter and manually set your exposure. I personally do not feel the need for AE, but I do feel the need for an integral meter as it helps me work the way I like - a personal thing I know. I do not feel remotely disadvantaged or any less ignorant of what is going on re the light though. Why is not using an integral meter better in the long run? My exposures with an integral meter are every bit as good as I will ever need them to be, excepting the odd error, which we all make. I simply shoot my various cameras as I do and then adjust film speeds to ensure that they all give me well exposed negs. I rate my Leicas 2/3 stop slower than my Mamiya and Bronica, but the negs end up with the same exposure using their internal meters so I can work the way I like using their meters and everything runs smoothly no matter which body I use.
As for the body, most Ms feel more than smooth enough and as an owner of a M2, M3, several MPs and a M6 I personally do not think the smoothness differences are even remotely noticeable if I am actually engaged in taking interesting pictures. If it is noticeable, chances are that I am not taking a photo of anything terribly engaging! FWIW the shutter release on the M3 is smoothest, followed by the late model M6 classic, with MPs behind that. I am sure someone else with the same cameras would say differently. All are built plenty well enough.
There are some very good reasons NOT to buy M2s, M3s and some M4s - mirror failure and also prism separation. Quite a few people get stung buy these issues, which are unlikely to bite you if you go for a later model. They are not cheap to rectify and a huge ball ache.
Each to their own, but to suggest it is somehow better to guess exposure, writing notes, testing etc rather than actually measuring the light sounds like a pretty flimsy argument. Remember that you can measure the light with your integral meter and makes notes too, then when you encounter similar conditions again, at least you have a constant (another reading from the same meter). Sure, estimation worked for the greats 50 years ago but they also produced some terribly exposed negatives - speak to a master printer who have to fight their way through thin shadows and blown highlights doing archive reprints. Just look at some of the prints too, which show tell tale signs of neg underexposure. A meter gives you facts (which one must interpret) and that is an awfully good starting point for getting things right IMHO.
In my case the absence of meter/arrows/lights/electronics forced me to slow down, pay more attention to existing light conditions. Recording the light conditions on a notepad, recording exposure and testing from there in the darkroon. Granted it is a lot slower and more time consuming than metered shooting when you are starting out, but it is more beneficial in the long run.
Besides, one may wonder why this 'empty article of faith' that you allude to has only recently aroused your suspicions? For an experienced photographer with a long history in the medium, why is this such a recent revelation?
I guess one could put it down to the recent internet invasion with every photog and their opinion. I assume that scenario wasn't as evident before with only the print medium of magazines and books to communicate ideas.
Back to the topic. To the original OP, I doubt that you would regret getting a good condition M3,M2, or M4. Once you get one you will see what all the fuss is about. Get the M3 if you want to concentrate on the 50mm lens, get the M2 if you want to get the 35mm lens or get the M4 for the best of both worlds. One could argue that the camera is merely a lightbox for capturing images and the M4P would then suit your needs. However, if you want to feel and enjoy every inflection of the camera then you won't regret one of those originals. The actual act of taking the photograph is heightened. But, each to his own.
Wow,
Thanks a lot for all the info.
Things can quite passionate with 'M' owners. ;-)
The notebook suggestion takes me back to when I started doing photography properly in '96 (not point and shoot compact).
I'd go out with my F50 and Sensia 100 (no errors to be printed out at the lab) and spend alot of time writing down the exposure for each frame, then compare it all when they came back. I learnt a lot the hard (and expensive) way.
I've decided that it's to an M6 classic or M7 (95%/5%).
Now what would be a sensible price to pay for an M6 Classic in mint cond?
Steve.
I've decided that it's to an M6 classic or M7 (95%/5%).
Now what would be a sensible price to pay for an M6 Classic in mint cond?
Steve.
Colour - Black & a 0.72
Steve.
Personally I get better exposures using my M4-p/M3 & an external handheld meter (using incident mode) than I do with my Nikon and its integrated meter. The reason is simple... incident metering doesn't lie, as long as you have the meter in the right light. Reflective metering has to be understood and correctly compensated.
Hi Steve,
December last year I bought my Leitz Wetzlar M6 for 1050 euro, or about $1400 at that time. It's a black chrome with 0.72 finder.
It's in great condition, no scratch, no ding and the viewfinder had been replaced with an MP finder. It had been CLA'd at Leica several months before I bought it, and the cost of the CLA alone was 950 euro (the seller sent me the receipt which list what had been repaired).
So, I guess an M6 in good condition will cost somewhere between $1000 to $1500. Check the classified section here, there are some M6 for sale there. Good luck.
Bob
Roger Hicks
08-23-2009, 04:40
Personally I get better exposures using my M4-p/M3 & an external handheld meter (using incident mode) than I do with my Nikon and its integrated meter. The reason is simple... incident metering doesn't lie, as long as you have the meter in the right light. Reflective metering has to be understood and correctly compensated.
Well, it won't lie as long as you're keying the exposure to the highlights -- another name for incident light metering is the artificial highlight method -- but it can't tell you how dark the shadows are. If they're within the latitude of the film/sensor, you're fine, but if they're too dark (in a subject with a long tonal range) you'll lose 'em. The only way to be sure of getting detail in the shadows is to meter them directly:
http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps%20expo%20neg.html
This is why there is one optimum metering technique for digital/transparency where exposure is keyed to the highlights (incident is easiest and most reliable, or you can use spot highlight) and another for negatives where exposure is keyed to the shadows (spot shadow). Though with a little experience you soon learn to interpret meter readings (pretty much any technique) to give the effect you want, or even to make remarkably accurate guesses most of the time.
Cheers,
R.
Yes, good point Roger. For my type of shooting, spot metering the shadows is seldom necessary. Incident is almost always good enough.
I sold my m6ttl and only kept my M2, but if it was my everyday camera I would want one with a meter I only use it with black and white and only for nostalgic reasons most of the time it sits on a shelf with a Nikon f and f2 both unmetered and black!
M2s are cheap and if you change your mind you can always ebay it and get your money back, my thoughts on the m4p and m42 they are more expensive than a m2 or m3 and not as nice.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.