M2 vs M6TTL - I'm spoiled for life!

markinlondon · 11-20-2006

I have just collected my M2 from Aperture where it was having a warranty repair on the shutter. It now opens at speeds above 1/60th. Hooray

In the ten days or so it was away I've been using my M6TTL again having put it aside when I bought the M2. The difference in these bodies is remarkable, I will soon be selling my M6 to finance another M2.
First, the finder; the M2 is so beautifully simple, no multiple frames, no flashing lights and a much more accurate 50 frame. Second, the advance is so smoooooth compared with the M6 especially now the shutter has been relubed. Thirdly, the release is much more positive without the microswitch at the halfway point. And, finally, I'm struck by the difference 3mm extra body height makes to the feel of the camera particularly if, like me, you have small hands.
In short, I'm ruined. I crave classic M's and older, single coated lenses. I'll even put up with the loading and the manual frame counter.

ChrisN · 11-20-2006

Mark - try an M4!

Magnus · 11-20-2006

I find the older M's to be very much smoother than the current ones. I have an MP which I really like (metering mostly) but I also have an M4 which is one of the smoothest cameras I have ever owned (after a Leica, Solms CLA) .... I do so dislike using an external meter though ...

steve garza · 11-20-2006

Mark,
I agree. Once I picked up an M2 (at 1/2 the price), the M6 was pushed to the back of the bag and stayed there. One thing I will say...a new MP is even better.....

markinlondon · 11-20-2006

You're all absolutely right, but "Get thee behind me, Satan"

Actually, I probably will when I go shopping for a second body, it's just that they're so expensive here at present and good M2's can be had quite reasonably. And does an MP (even used) really give the value of three or four M2's?

shenkerian · 11-20-2006

Hi Mark, congratulations on your healthy M2. As someone deciding between similar bodies as yours, I'm curious whether you'll miss the 28mm framelines at all. I really like the idea of isolated 35 and 50 in an M body (I consider the Ikon's framelines pretty much perfect).

Also, can you tell any difference between the "matte" framelines in the M2 and the framelines in the M6 TTL?

Thanks.

f8&go · 11-20-2006

Can anyone comment specifically on the use
of the M2 finder with a 35mm lense while
wearing GLASSES?

Thank you. If I've asked this before I
just can't remember the answer.

Magnus · 11-20-2006

The MP as a camera is certainly not worth the money, but this is a pretty subjective statement.... For the same amount you can buy an M2, M3 and M4 but what to do with all these cameras....

Don't forget at the time of introduction of the M2, 3 and 4 these were also very expensive. Now we purchase a 40 year camera for the price of a Sony digital R-1 or many other state of the art cameras... is it worth it ... ?

The value is also in the eye of the beholder ....

Flyfisher Tom · 11-20-2006

my vote for the M3 and M4

markinlondon · 11-20-2006

I won't miss the 28 frame as I've never actually seen it ( I wear glasses) and I don't own or intend to own a 28mm lens at present. The same goes for 135. The M2 frames are "bolder" i.e. a little thicker and somehow less "intrusive" but that's probably just the lack of extra stuff inside the frame.
As for the 35, I can just see all four sides with my glasses on, but not much outside. I do have very flexible titanium frames that bend into my face when using the finder, though.

lubitel · 11-20-2006

mark, how does the smoothness of your M2 after the cla compare to its smoothness before the cla? I think my M2 is quite smooth, but I wouldnt say that its smoother than, say m4 (which I just tried this weekend)

shenkerian · 11-20-2006

Thanks Mark. I doubt I'll miss the 28mm either then -- it sounds like the entire frame will be a reasonable approximation. Enjoy your M2.

f8&go · 11-20-2006

Thanks for the eyeglass report.

raid · 11-20-2006

I have both a mint M3 and a mint M6. The M3 feels much more "professional" but the M6 has a meter. The film advance feels better in the M3. Both are great cameras to use.

Raid

drewbarb · 11-20-2006

I learned to use a RF with an M3, and it's still my favorite camera. I thought I'd prefer an in-camera meter, so I bought an M6. But after a while, I realized that the paired and less accurate framelines bothered me, and the meter diode lights were just annoying. I found myself looking at them all the time and fiddling with my exposure rather than concentrating on my subjects. Now I much prefer to use my hand-held meter, get my exposure readings settled in my head and then think about my subjects and surroundings, and let the monkey-brain handle the exposure adjustments. I bring the camera up to quickly compose and check focus, and maybe shoot- although I'm just as likely to shoot with the camera not in my face. For me, the simplicity of the older cameras has bred confidence in my own ability, and affords me more attention on the subjects, and less attention on the camera.

I won't even go into how smooth and delightful the function of the old bodies is. Sufice to say that the 1999 M6 classic I owned didn't feel nearly as good. I had an M4P which was better, but now I just use a pair of M3's. I sometimes consider adding an M2 for a 35mm frameline, but with a goggled 35, I just don't need it.

markinlondon · 11-20-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by lubitel

mark, how does the smoothness of your M2 after the cla compare to its smoothness before the cla? I think my M2 is quite smooth, but I wouldnt say that its smoother than, say m4 (which I just tried this weekend)

It wasn't a full CLA, Lubitel, just a shutter service under warranty. Before the service there was a slight roughness in the advance. I now realise that this was down to the shutter cocking and was only slight. I think the M2, M3 and M4 are pretty much alike in smoothness, largely due to the brass gearing. The MP's I've handled are similar.

As for built-in meters. When you're as careless about turning the shutter dial to "OFF" and as lax about carrying spare batteries as I am, you tend to learn sunny 16 as a survival technique. Also my first SLR had a broken meter and I couldn't afford one after buying it. Practice makes, if not perfect, at least good enough for print film.

jshelly · 11-20-2006

While we're on the subject, what the going price for a minty M2 these days?

DeeCee3 · 11-20-2006

I used an M2 for years with no apparent problems in framing the 35mm outline (I wear glasses, too). Another "work-around" I learned was to use the RF patch as the framing reference for the old Hektor 135mm glass. It left a good bit to be desired, of course, but it gave a passable alternative. If you were REALLY careful and breathed quite deliberately, you could usually get a fairly shake-free shot.

dc3

Joe Brugger · 11-20-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeeCee3

I used an M2 for years with no apparent problems in framing the 35mm outline (I wear glasses, too).

dc3

Same here; the 35 frames were easy to see with the M2, even with specs. People wearing glasses around old Leicas, though, should invest $15 or so in one of the snap-on plastic eyepieces that Don Goldberg sells at http://www.dagcamera.com/leica_m.htm

steve garza · 11-20-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by markinlondon

You're all absolutely right, but "Get thee behind me, Satan"

Actually, I probably will when I go shopping for a second body, it's just that they're so expensive here at present and good M2's can be had quite reasonably. And does an MP (even used) really give the value of three or four M2's?

value. Everone already knows that . What does an M2/3/6/P/8 do that a cheap Voigtlander body doesn't do? Come on.....none of this is about value. Trying put degrees of value on this whole thing is just silly. That's one dead horse that does not need more beating!!!!

back alley · 11-20-2006

anyone know of a website that shows the framelines for the different m's?

joe

edodo · 11-21-2006

A mint M2 can reach skyhigh prices! But with luck, and if you invest time, you can have one for 700 euro; 600 if you are lucky

markinlondon · 11-21-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve garza

value. Everone already knows that . What does an M2/3/6/P/8 do that a cheap Voigtlander body doesn't do? Come on.....none of this is about value. Trying put degrees of value on this whole thing is just silly. That's one dead horse that does not need more beating!!!!

OK, Steve, maybe I used the wrong word. I should have said "utility" rather than "value". Three M2's gives me the chance of shooting with two lenses or two different film stocks and still having a backup body to guard against breakdowns due to age. The MP is a beautiful camera but does not make economic sense for me while I can buy good M2's. Add to this the fact that to get the finder I like I'd have to go down the a la carte route and I'll stand by my "value" statement.
Oh, and a good, working M2 (not "mint") costs very little more than a "cheap" Voigtlander body in this country.

edodo · 11-21-2006

That's right a good CLA'd M2/M3/M4 body is the real thing without the cost of the MP. If you have learn to read the light and shoot black and white emulsion, then those classic M bodies are all you need!

Pherdinand · 11-21-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by edodo

A mint M2 can reach skyhigh prices! But with luck, and if you invest time, you can have one for 700 euro; 600 if you are lucky

Well, it's not mint, but I got mine for 450 euro through RFF! And i start to like it, after 2 rolls of film. It's not that hard to load - i always hated the idea of bottom loading but seems to be going fine.