This is confusing: Choosing M4 vs M6

I'm deciding which one I should buy if I eventually have enough fund.

Reading the last posts, I set aside M2 and M3s since some warned that

the VF will tend to have separation, plus they're ~40 years old and

if you must fix them (very expensive and maybe can't be fixed?),

might as well get the later models. Another thing I don't like about

M2/3 is the slow rewind button, although I can always get the rewind

attachment for $99, which IMO is too expensive for a little piece of

metal. Maybe this combo is still cheaper than buying M4 though.

 

My first lens would be either 35 or 50, but M3 does not have 35mm

frameline. "Unfortunately" M3 has the most accurate VF (according to

Stephen Gandy), so this got me thinking about getting M3 and maybe

buy the extra 35mm VF on top of the camera. But still, the VF

separation?? Hmm...

 

Some said (forgot who it was) that if the M4 needs CLA, might as well

get M6 classic. Well M4 only have 35/50/90/135 brightlines as

opposed to the much cluttered M6's 28/35/50/75/90/135 finder system.

I heard its hard to see them anyway. Like I said, my first lens

would be either 35 or 50 (still can't decide) and plan to eventually

add one in the range of 85 to 105 for potrait. Probably 90 since

there's no 85 or 105 lines on the VF. But some of you said that 100

is the sharpest? Or was that Nikon? I think I got all of these

information mixed up.

 

OK so I assume if I get a good M4 which doesn't need CLA, then it

should be cheaper than M6. Right? I guess not. I just went to

KEH.com to check out the prices.

 

M4 Chrome Ex+ $1479

 

M6 classic Black .72 Ex+ $1299

 

They even have the TTL in Like New Minus for less than the M4.

 

So what am I missing here?

 

BTW, anyone in the DC/MD/VA area who knows where I can rent Leica M?

"They even have the TTL in Like New Minus for less than the M4.

So what am I missing here?" <p> M4's are rarer/collectible -supposedly the last of the "classic Leica era". <p> If it were me, the biggest factor would be do you need/want an in camera meter or not. I had a M4 and it was great, but I'm now getting an M6TTL cuz it'll be nice to have an in camera meter. <p>At todays used M6TTL prices, you really can�t beat the bang-for-the-buck (in Leicadom at least). For that �classic� feel, I still have my M2.

Compared to my M4, the only thing I like about my M6 is the meter. The M4 frame lines are closer to the actual size of the image on film. And the M4 viewfinder doesn't have the 75mm frame lines which I will never need. And I do occasionally use the selftimer for vacation shots.

 

PJW

Leo,

 

Welcome to the world of Leica. I agree with you that the M4-7 are the best choices. M4's can be found for as little as $700 on this site. You have to be fast, they go quickly. You may need a CLA right away, or you may get by for a couple of years, it's really hard to tell.

 

My advice, and what I did? Set a price you are comfortable with and find a body to match it. I found a late model (last run I think)

M4-2 for just over $600. Will it need a CLA soon? Maybe, but if it does, I'll have a nice M in perfect working shape for under $900.

 

I'd start with the 50 summicron since it will be the cheapest and sharpest. I had a 35 summaron LTM, so that's what I'm starting with. Get to know that lens for at least six months. Then you'll know what you need next, if anything at all.

 

Good Luck.

1. 3rd party info is helpful but you can't use it to make a reliable choice without ever having handled the cameras yourself.

 

2. The M4 was last made in 1975 and only a few of them, most that come up for sale are from 1967-1970 making them just as likely to need service as an M2, although the viewfinder decementation issue and the ridiculous pull-up rewind and separate-spool loading aren't problems you'll have to deal with if you get an M4.

 

3. As you've seen, prices for EXC+ or better M4's are quite high, due to the rarity of finding one in that condition. Recognize that a mint-in-box M4 that has never been used will require a complete overhaul to get it working, as the shutter will have ceased to operate properly due to dry lubricant and no amount of working it will free it up. This is a typical Leica issue, unlike a Nikon F which can go decades without being used and still perform up to specs.

 

4. In terms of *economy* a late M6TTL is the better bet. An M4 with a few nicks and scrapes that has been recently serviced by DAG or Kinderman is the better camera.

Depending on how much a Leica is used it's going to need a CLA every 5 to 10 years. This is what Don Goldberg told me recently when he was in the process of CLAing my M6 and M4. That means a lot of the M6's you buy today should have a CLA done on them as the production run of M6's started in 1984. When my M6 came back from Don it was MUCH better. The shutter release and wind on were much smoother.

 

Jay is correct in his first point. The only bad thing is that once you actually pick up a nice M4 you will want one.

I have had RF patch problems with my M3 (faint/ chipped/ out of alignment) and IIIf (not visible at all) both repaired at Essex camera in New Jersey. I had the M3 rebuilt last spring, the door-to-door turn-around time was 12 days and the Viewfinder is crystal clear, the RF patch is very bright and well defines, and the focus is right on with my 135mm lens. Cost was $280, which also included correcting a shutter drag problem at low speeds, and repairing the vulcanite. The IIIf also came back like new.

 

The M4/M6 would be a better choice if you plan on using a 35mm lens most often. But, if you want an M3 you do not have to get a separate finder to use a 35mm lens. I have a 35mm F2.8 Summaron with "EYES" that convert the 50mm frame of the M3 to a 35mm view. It ran under 400 in near mint condition at a camera show. I do not use a 35mm lens often on my RF's, so it is more than adequate.

Any M4 that you purchase will need a CLA unless it has had one in the past 8-10 years. A good CLA will run you $200-275 bucks. Any camera that is decades old should get a cleaning, regardless of brand. The laws of nature and chemistry; meaning the breakdown of lubricants etc. over time, apply to cameras of all makes and nationalities. Uncleaned the camera may appear to be working properly, but I would not bet money on the accuracy of the shutter speeds and you will increase the wear and tear on the mechanism, which may lead to an expensive repair down the road.

 

>Well M4 only have 35/50/90/135 bright lines as opposed to the much >cluttered M6's 28/35/50/75/90/135 finder system. I heard its hard to >see them anyway.

 

Have you ever looked through the finder of an M6? It's not really that bad and the frame lines are very bright and crisp. I prefer the M2/M4 framlines, but the ones in the later cameras are far from unusable.

Steve Gandy has a very nice site, but he sometimes tends to be a little overly passionate on some subjects.

 

>But some of you said that 100 is the sharpest?

 

There is a 2.8/100 APO for the Leica-R (SLR) line which is considered a benchmark lens. The current 90 ASPH for the M and R is probably the best in its class.

 

My suggestion would be that as your first M you get a M6 or M6TTL with the .72 magnification. You get a meter and a fairly new camera.

 

Feli

My first Leica was an M4. And as long as that was my only body, it got rather a lot of

use. But I later got an M6 and found the meter to be very convenient and a bit

quicker to use. I eventually traded the M4 for another M6. Yes, the M4 was

mechanically superb, smooth and a pleasure to use. But the convenience of an

internal meter defeated that for me...I just wasn't using the camera and decided to

get something I would use, and time has indicated I made a good choice...

The decision of trade off between an M4 and M6 is a self-timer and a meter, respectively. It makes absolutely no sense to me to get an M4-2 or an M4-P (produced in the late 1970's and early 1980's after the demise of the M5), because they're not significantly less expensive that an M6 (and none of them have a meter or a self timer).

 

If you decide on the M4, you're getting the last non-metered "tank," but you're going to pay a premium for its collectability. An E+ M4 will likely fetch about the same as a like-new M6.

 

On the other hand, I'm convinced any M6 will hold up for a person's lifetime and it's going to be at least 10 years newer (if you get a Wetzlar M6 � the oldest among them).

Leo,

 

Penn Camera rents the M6 TTL with a 35mm lens. (see http://www.penncamera.com/pdfs/rental1103.pdf for prices). The daily rate is reasonable, but for lens and camera you will need $3,000 for a deposit.

 

I believe the Penn Camera store in Rockville has the M7 and MP in stock if you want to fondle the new versions.

 

- David

I got myself an M4 last week. It has a few nicks and strap lug marks, otherwise very

nice (shutter, advance, rangefinder etc).

 

I wouldn't have minded an M6 instead, but the M4 and a new Digisix was quite a bit

cheaper than the used M6 prices I looked at here in Stockholm.

 

I paid 9000 SEK ($1125) for my M4, M6's are usually around 14000 SEK ($1750). The

dollar has fallen quite a bit lately, I'm couting 1 US$ = 8 SEK.

 

Also, the legendary Wetzlar smoothness can make me forget I have to lug the meter

around... the first roll came back excellent btw.

Thank you all for your input. To sum up, I guess the M6/M6TTL would be the best buy in the long run. Now the problem is, do I really need TTL? Since it's for flash. Dedicated flash or 3rd party flash? Well, I have not done my homework on this one yet. I might use flash occasionally although not a big fan of using flash.

Only a couple/few flashes will work with the camera in TTL, and some flashes will FRY the electronics in the camera.

 

Steve

Only a couple? I'm assuming one of them must be the Leica brand flash. What's the other? I guess I can't use Vivitar 283/285?