All those Leica MP film rigs

[kshapero]

Had no idea there were so many variants of the famed Leica MP film cameras.

https://jerrybei.com/reviews/2018/1/...llection-guide

Did he miss any?

[Erik van Straten]

It is a shame that all these rare cameras are already almost worn out due to their constant use.


Erik.

[Out to Lunch]

Which is why some 5 years ago, I went for an M6 TTL. Old stock -new in box from a seller in the UK. Works like a charm today.

[Dogman]

Originally Posted by Erik van Straten

It is a shame that all these rare cameras are already almost worn out due to their constant use.

Erik.

Yeah. Every time I see one of these pristine collector's issues I just want to grab it and use the devil out of it.

[Ko.Fe.]

MP must be for Malade Prices. And not even for collectible ones.

[ktmrider]

Let's face it, all Leicas have some of the same mystique which these collector's editions have. Which is why a working M2 or M3 will demand $1000 or more but a Nikon F will only go for $250-300 assuming the same age and condition.

Like the chicken and the egg, does the Leica mystique lead to high prices or do the high prices lead to the Leica mystique. If the Leica mystique was not present, would people collect them?

[Erik van Straten]

For me there is no Leica mystique, only quality. From 1925 on Leitz produced cameras and lenses of a tremendous quality. That is no mystique, only reality.

Erik.

[Ko.Fe.]

Originally Posted by ktmrider

Let's face it, all Leicas have some of the same mystique which these collector's editions have. Which is why a working M2 or M3 will demand $1000 or more but a Nikon F will only go for $250-300 assuming the same age and condition.

Like the chicken and the egg, does the Leica mystique lead to high prices or do the high prices lead to the Leica mystique. If the Leica mystique was not present, would people collect them?

You are mixing collection editions with regular cameras.
Leica M total production is minuscule comparing to F made in rail freight loads of coal.
You can't have same pricing for most made and less made cameras.

And now with film been dead more than alive... still maybe ugly F6 is just as expensive as beautiful NIB MP.

[Ko.Fe.]

Originally Posted by Erik van Straten

For me there is no Leica mystique, only quality. From 1925 on Leitz produced cameras and lenses of a tremendous quality. That is no mystique, only reality.

Erik.

1925 made cameras are primitives. Primitiveness is main source of reliability.

As for quality, my Canon LTM camera is as quality as Leica LTM.

And my FSU lenses are much better lenses in terms of glass quality and how they are made. Jupiter-3 is superior lens to Lux 50 1.4 of same age.
It has much better glass (no fungus, no separation, no soft coatings). It is more compact lens as well and does not swirl the background.

Look at Leica SLRs. They are not on demand, nor they are mystique and they are ugly.
I think, main attraction of real Leica cameras is in their minimalism and compactness. They are slick and sexy.

[Erik van Straten]

Originally Posted by Ko.Fe.

Primitiveness is main source of reliability.

Many primitive cameras are not reliable at all.

The 1925 Leica is not primitive at all. It is extremely well made. It is a very refined and reliable camera, except the viewfinder. I've been asking myself for many years why they have put a 35mm viewfinder on a camera with a fixed 50mm lens.

I can add a negative point of the 1925 Leica. The lens of the Leica IA is fixed by three screws that are screwed directly into the aluminum housing of the camera. Aluminium is too soft for this.

Erik.

[aizan]

Originally Posted by kshapero

Did he miss any?

Here are the ones I found:

Republic of China Centennial
60th Anniversary of PRC
Ahn Jung-geun Camera, 60th Anniversary of Korea’s Independence
Terry O'Neill
Ralph Gibson

[Huss]

Wasnt the Ralph Gibson edition a digital camera?

My favourite is the hammertone edition.

[Erik van Straten]

It is a pity that the paint of the black paint edition becomes so very glossy after a few years. The matte black of the black paint M2/M3 is so much nicer.

I do not like any of the fantasy editions of the MP. An MP should be a professional camera, not a collectors item.

Erik.

[Deardorff38]

Originally Posted by Erik van Straten

It is a pity that the paint of the black paint edition becomes so very glossy after a few years. The matte black of the black paint M2/M3 is so much nicer.

I do not like any of the other fantasy editions of the MP. An MP should be a professional camera, not a collectors item.

Erik.

Absolutely agree with you Erik.

[Ko.Fe.]

Originally Posted by Erik van Straten

Many primitive cameras are not reliable at all.

The 1925 Leica is not primitive at all. It is extremely well made. It is a very refined and reliable camera, except the viewfinder. I've been asking myself for many years why they have put a 35mm viewfinder on a camera with a fixed 50mm lens.

I can add a negative point of the 1925 Leica. The lens of the Leica IA is fixed by three screws that are screwed directly into the aluminum housing of the camera. Aluminium is too soft for this.

Erik.

Wait a second... Leica 1925 has not well made viewfinder and problematic lens mount, according to you. And you are calling it as "extremely well made"... Problem with viewfinder and lens. What else left in this box? A shutter? You have working shutter, but nor lens, nor VF are good. According to you. And you are calling it as "extremely well made"...

IMO. Leica f series is where (and only) Barnacks became extremely well made.
Before f, Barnacks are so-so. Just slightly better made than Zorki and have lower speeds. Canon LTMs are surpassing pre F by quality. IMO.

But still, I would take 1925 Leica over LTM Canon. If I have money to waste. Again, nothing to do with quality. It just slick, sexy and status.

[Erik van Straten]

Originally Posted by Ko.Fe.

Wait a second... Leica 1925 has not well made viewfinder and problematic lens mount, according to you. And you are calling it as "extremely well made"... Problem with viewfinder and lens. What else left in this box? A shutter? You have working shutter, but nor lens, nor VF are good. According to you. And you are calling it as "extremely well made"...

IMO. Leica f series is where (and only) Barnacks became extremely well made.
Before f, Barnacks are so-so. Just slightly better made than Zorki and have lower speeds. Canon LTMs are surpassing pre F by quality. IMO.

But still, I would take 1925 Leica over LTM Canon. If I have money to waste. Again, nothing to do with quality. It just slick, sexy and status.

They are extremely well made, still working perfectly after more than 90 years ... (I have four of them). Leitz improved the viewfinder in the Leica II and perfected the shutter and the rangefinder in the Leica III. A Leica III is a much better camera than a IIIc or a IIIf if you ask me. IIIc and IIIf are die-cast, when old they leak light, get deformed and break.

Erik.

[kshapero]

Leica of Miami lent me this MP while my Black Paint MP was getting fixed.

[Dralowid]

Would I be right in saying that the M6 was the last Leica to be used regularly by mainstream professional photographers?

[Out to Lunch]

To the best of my knowledge, very many professional photographers abandoned their Leicas for Nikon and Canon SLR's during the late sixties.... i.e. some fifteen years before Leica came out with the M6.

[Dan Daniel]

Originally Posted by kshapero

Leica of Miami lent me this MP while my Black Paint MP was getting fixed.

Hard to tell from the photo because of the flash- is this the extremely rare "Gummi Bear" MP, or the more common "M&M" MP?

[sem]

leica mp by rcfed, auf Flickr

Don´t know if this is special: Bought without packing.

[kshapero]

Originally Posted by Dan Daniel

Hard to tell from the photo because of the flash- is this the extremely rare "Gummi Bear" MP, or the more common "M&M" MP?

This was part of the 3 body demos the dealers got about 10 years ago.

[kshapero]

Originally Posted by Dralowid

Would I be right in saying that the M6 was the last Leica to be used regularly by mainstream professional photographers?

Very incorrect. What's a mainstream Professional photographer anyway?Pros have been using Leica's from the 1930's to present day. But I will say the Nikon F and F2 put a big dent in that timeline in the 60's and early 70's.

[Deardorff38]

This is what an MP looks like..... the 'commemorative' editions are all vanity:

https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/4474749...02279/?lp=true

[Deardorff38]

As an aside, when I had a (film) MP (new series) it took me a very long time to find one that showed any wear at all. All the ones for sale were virtually untouched. Strange for a camera re-released in 2003. IMG_2799 by [url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/], on Flickr

[Erik van Straten]

Deardorff, funny that you have a SBLOO on your MP; the MP possesses quite good 35mm framelines.


Erik.

[davidnewtonguitars]

Originally Posted by Erik van Straten

It is a shame that all these rare cameras are already almost worn out due to their constant use.

Erik.

A German fellow came to my shop to look at a guitar, and he had a gorgeous MP slung over his shoulder, said he was going on vacation. I asked him where? I was the stop on the way to the Gulf of Mexico beach cabin where his family would be for a week. So some of them get used, a bit.

[Deardorff38]

Erik, The finder is very good, (although I prefer the M4), We were in Taos & Santa Fe and for quick shooting in town with Tri-X, prefer having the hyperfocal distance set & quick framing through the SBLOO

[miha]

Originally Posted by Ko.Fe.

d.

Look at Leica SLRs. They are not on demand, nor they are mystique and they are ugly.

I beg to differ, Sir!

[newsgrunt]

Originally Posted by Dralowid

Would I be right in saying that the M6 was the last Leica to be used regularly by mainstream professional photographers?

nope. many use that camera, MPs, M240s and M10s. Obvs not in great numbers but we're out there.

[Guth]

I understand that commemorative models can be traced pretty far back in Leitz camera history. Is there any agreed upon point in time when Leica became more of a lifestyle brand overall?

[aizan]

that was when dr. kaufmann bought 95% of leica in 2004.

leica made deluxe limited editions before that, and became the dentist’s preferred camera in the 1980s and ‘90s (or did that cliche start earlier?), but it wasn’t the full blown lifestyle brand that it is today.

[Archiver]

Originally Posted by davidnewtonguitars

A German fellow came to my shop to look at a guitar, and he had a gorgeous MP slung over his shoulder, said he was going on vacation. I asked him where? I was the stop on the way to the Gulf of Mexico beach cabin where his family would be for a week. So some of them get used, a bit.

This says more about me than the cameras, but for someone to look at my M9 and have similar thoughts of admiration and photographic romance would be oddly satisfying. I've had mine for almost 9 years, and it remains my favourite camera. Just yesterday, I went for a pre-Christmas photo walk. But I still have the itching for a MP which I would use and use and use. I have a stock M7, but I find the outward 'clean' look of the MP to be more appealing.

An alternative would be to go ahead with getting my M9 upgraded to M9-P while it is still possible. I'd have the best of both worlds, then. A clean, classic look in a camera that I've loved for years.

As for the MP itself, I've seen three anthracite MPs in shops. Two in Hong Kong, and one in Japan. If there's a collectible MP that I'd use, it would be this one.

F30 - Leica Gear by Archiver, on Flickr