Difference in New M Models ?

Hello,

 

Less than a year ago I purchased the new R9 camera with the

35-70 lens. I bought it too fast without proper pondering, it is

really not what I wanted (too electric)....so I am going to sell it and

get an M....I would ask for advice regarding which one -- per my

understanding of the offerings.....I just remember my

grandfathers M? and the emotional and consequential feeling

one has when holding the camera (he and my father used to let

me use it 20 years ago)...and everything was always sharp...any

way...as I look at the current Leica offerings, I want to be sure I

understand the differences.... of note... for black and white and

color slides I have used mainly a Honeywell Spotmatic and a

Nikon FM2T....I really like just the "manualness" of these

cameras...)....it is half the fun understanding how the camera

interprets the light....(yeah, I got sidetracked with a D2X for a bit,

but I am almost done with my darkroom).....I shoot for fun,

landscapes and nature..mostly on tripod and mostly with a 50MM

lens (I live in Vermont)...I think I should look at the MP

0.72....because....

 

The M7's seem to have the type of electronic stuff I would rather

not have, great camera, just more than I want...correct?

 

The MP's seem to be what I am after, all manual with only the

meter demanding power...correct?

 

MP 3 seems to be a special edition camera, same as MP but

with a premium price

 

I would initially put a 50MM lens on the camera, that is what I do

for 80% of my shooting.

 

And I guess I would look at the 0.72 viewfinder as this is the

"normal" one..right?...one other question, I often take water shots

(with D2X) that demand 2-3 second exposures, can you do that

with this camera?...it seems that it only goes to 1 second...

 

In advance, thank you for your comments....Chris

M7 - think of an M6TTL with an electronic shutter with two back-up manual speeds (60 and 125).

 

MP - an M6 classic configured like an M3 (just replace the self timer with a battery compartment and ad a brass top cover). The M6 top covers are a zinc alloy and have the M4 style RW mechanism.

 

OTOH, if it's your grandfather's camera you want, perhaps you should look for a used M. You'll get what you're after and save up to two thirds when compared to the price of an M7/MP. Just be prepared to have it CLA'd.

If you use a 50mm lens for 80% of your shooting, you might want to consider an M3, M2 or M4 rather than a more recent M, such as the MP, because the older cameras have frame lines for the 50mm field of view that are, in my opinion, more functional.

 

I have read, but cannot independently confirm, that the MP3 has these older-style frame lines. If so, that feature alone might make the camera worth the price premium.

 

You can't really go wrong with an MP. I have one and love everything about it...except for the undersized 50mm frame.

My vote is for an M2,3 or 4. Sounds like you don't need a built-in meter since you are on a tripod and have lots of time to meter a scene. One thing I like about the older M's is the more accurate frame lines, most noticeably the 50mm frame lines, which are important to you. Also the older M's bring up only the 50mm framelines. The newer M's have the 50 and 75mm frame lines paired together.

 

If you are thinking of adding a 35 look for the M2 or 4. If you think it would be a 90mm lens go with an M3.

 

As Bill said, factor in the cost of a CLA unless you find a body with a recent CLA from one of the well-known Leica techs. You could buy a *very* nice M4 for $1,200, spend $300 on a CLA ands still be far ahead cash-wise compared to a new MP. A nice M2 would be several hundred dollars less than an M4.

 

For the longer speeds you would probably want a cable release and use the bulb setting.

If you are shooting for fun w/tripod and mostly landscape/nature then why screw around with an M, though capable, and more than adaquate as most any camera would be, its not the best tool for that sort of thing.

 

Why not do the real deal and either move up to Medium Format and/or Large Format? Hassy systems are really priced down now for the used 500 series. Start with a normal lens (80mm). Its a little heavier to carry, but you've already got a tripod. If size and weight are not a big issue, I'd look at that option, or one of the other excellent MF's if you don't like the square format. If taken right, MF and LF will simply blow away anything you could do with the leica especially if you want to go big. Plus if you want to crop, you have a much larger negative to work with.

Sounds like Jonathon and I are on the same page. :)

 

I've heard that too about the MP3 frame lines and would like to know if they are more accurate like the older M's.

Leica = handheld, at least for me. Landscape = tripod + MF or LF camera. Another vote for a 'blad system. They are practically giving away pentax 6x7 stuff these days...

 

good luck

Chris - you sound very honest when you write and I recommend you should not start making compromises again.

Either get a used M6 or a new MP - do it manually and based on what you said bevore you will really enjoy it....

 

"Life is full of save decisions"

 

Wish you lost of perfect light

Robert (Munich/Germany)

Chris, you have everything well figured out. If you prefer manual cameras, you'll love an MP with a 50mm Summicron and 0.72 finder. To make exposures longer than 1 second, use the "B" shutter setting with a bulb or cable release. Accessory self timers are available at B&H for about $15. I've had my MP 3 years and I love it! Best regards, Bill

I agree with Barry and Patrick. Of course you can put a Leica on a tripod and shoot great landscapes with it, but shooting static subjects with well-stopped-down lenses is not why people pay for Leica gear.

 

If you can live with just a normal lens, you might consider a Rolleiflex TLR. These are wonderful on even a light tripod and have all the "manualness" and build quality you seek in a Leica. Off the tripod, a Rolleiflex shares the Leica's ability to shoot very quietly and at slow shutter speeds.

Thank you....as you can probably tell, my desires are born of

emotion, and some from practicality (although tis not an even

split)....emotion demands a Lieca as derived from the memories

of time with my grandfather and father.....with all the other stuff I

own, an F6 would make the most "sense".....why new, well I just

like virgin stuff so the wear reflects my memories (not practical I

know, but I have been waiting a long time for this and it really

goes back to that "feeling of consequense")...I would love MF, but

I know nothing about this stuff, and -- really the only practical

thought as I ponder this purchase -- my darkroom contains a Ic

and V35....nothing for MF....I think it will be a new MP with the

50MM...thank you to all

Just a comment to Jim. If you buy an "a la carte" MP you have the option of having the 50mm frameline on its own. Seems like a lot of money for one less frame, but...

I bought an M3 on Ebay for $468 and put a chrome 50/2 on it. Then I bought a Gossen Luna Pro S light meter with the variable angle attachment which makes it work like a spot meter. I've got great results and I enjoy guessing the exposure. If interested in learning how to do this get the Ultimate Exposure Computer at FredGibson dot com ( for free ). Also, the M3 has a self timer so I can take pictures of my wife and I in exotic places. I also have an M6 TTL, an M7, and an MP. Note that the frame moves if you put an M on a tripod and focus because of parallax correction. The M7 is quick, mine is .58 which is best for wide angle, the others are .72. I shoot birds and wildlife with the M6 with a 135 f/3.4 and a motor. Bottom line is if I wanted to shoot quickly with a 50mm I would get an M7 with a .72 finder. If I wanted to learn I would get an M3. If I wanted a camera with a light meter and didn't mind spending money I would get the MP or MP 3 black paint. If I wanted a great camera for around $1200 I would get a used M6 or M6 TTL.

Carl,

It's Fred Parker, not Fred Gibson.

 

best,

Valery