Leica M7 and 50mm lens starter kit any good?

<p>I found one of these in the box at a local camera store yesterday selling for less than half the new price. I've been interested in Leica for some time now and am tempted to pick this up. Is the 50mm f2 lens that comes with the body a good one or should I hold out for a used M6 with a 35mm Summicron? I am a Nikon shooter so am used to SLRs, but I shot with a Canon GIII QL17 and Contax IIIa rangefinder back in the 80s so I am familiar with how they work.<br /> I am attracted to the M7 as it has Aperture priority and is a newer body compared to the M6. I use Aperture priority all the time with my Nikon F3HP and the meter is good enough to get good slide exposures from it. How is the meter in the M7?<br /> Your opinions appreciated.</p>

<p>Any Summicron is good; the main problem with a 50mm is that the viewfinder isn't optimised for one (the only one that is, is on the M3) so you have a 50mm frame with a load of wasted space round it. 50mm is also slightly limited indoors or for large groups of people. Having said that, there is a VAST difference in price between the 50mm and the 35mm ASPH (the clue's in those four initials) although you could have an older 35mm*, or even a Zeiss Biogon for a lot less.</p>

<p>The M7 is a completely different animal to the M6 and the two aren't really comparable. M6 is fully mechanical, with a meter added on. M7 has an electronic shutter.</p>

<p>The meter is as good as its user. It's a sort of spot meter (it reads off a silver patch on the shutter curtain).</p>

<p>*I use a 1950s Summaron 35/3.5 with an screw-to-M adapter and it's quite satisfactory - a bit soft at the edges of a 40" x 30" print (yes, I do mean inches) but that's about twice the accepted size limit of 35mm enlargement anyway. A bit more contrast would be nice, but you can't complain for a $300 lens.</p>

<p>I would be concerned with the vintage of the camera. Early Leica M7 and M6/M6TTL/, (all M bodies after the M4, I believe), rangefinders suffer occasional blanking out when shot in bright light. This problem has been resolved in later models of the M7. Some older Leica M finders can be retrofitted with new finder parts for about $300, which will fix the annoying phenomenon . Also, there were one or two other issues which were addressed in later models of the M7, one having to do with DX coding. I would do some research before buying this Leica M7 to see if it a more recent version.</p>

<p>The 50mm focal length frames well, or perhaps best, looking through a Leica M3, but will work just fine on an Leica M7.</p>

<p>I've never used the M7, but had a Konica Hexar RF (excellent) M lens mount camera which is similar in performance and also with the occasional advantages of auto exposure. The M6 is a manual exposure camera with a fairly good meter (again, I sold mine sometime ago to finance some MF purchases, but can vouch for its quality) and a proven cloth shutter design that dates back to 1920's in terms of original conception.</p>

<p>The space around the 50mm frame in the M7, M6, M4's, M2, MP and digital M's is a great advantage in much RF practice, as this is one thing that sets apart the M Leica from SLR's - the ability to compose elements of subject matter about to enter the frame and the nice ability to consider a composition inside and outside the frame.</p>

<p>The M3 with its greater VF magnification (circa 90%, versus 0.72 - although one M6 is available with an 0.85X VF) is fine for faster lenses than the f2 Summicron (including the f0.95 50mm Noctilux and f1.4 lenses), owing to its larger RF baseline. I don't think there is very much difference in the age of most used M6 and M7 cameras, except that you can still get a new M7 I believe. The top price film MP replaced the M6 and is a small (but to some, significant) upgrade from it. Expect to pay a bit more for a mint or clean M7 than the same condition M6. Leica mechanical cameras like the M6 and its ancestors last a long time if not abused.</p>

<p>Printing larger than 12 x 18 inches on a 35mm film camera brings one really into the realm of softness in any case, unless one is using a super fine grain B&W film (Alas, Kodak Technical Pan no longer exists, and the European quasi-equivalent by another manufacturer is hard to get and quite contrasty), or possibly Velvia 50 in colour. The Summicron lens and the 50mm f2 Zeiss equivalent are possibly the best 50mm lenses out there.</p>

<p>Robert is no doubt right in regard to some early M6 models (Production being resumed again in Germany may be partly responsible for that), but the two (one from the very early 80s, the other built in 1989) I had gave me minimal difficulty in shooting under virtually all conditions.</p>

<p>My Nikon F3 exposed transparency film more accurately than my Leica M6, using straight readings. I believe the metering of the M7 is very similar to the M6 so you might have to meter different areas of a scene and average the results to get the best exposures with transparency film, especially the lower ISO films. However, I don't own a Leica M7, so maybe someone else should speak to this.</p>

<p>If from any Authorized Leica Dealer with Warranty, it's a very good purchase. If it hasn't had the Optical ASA reader or upgraded viewfinder, both will be done by Leica under warrenty at no charge. Coming from a Nikon background, the metering system will be familiar and will work well. I have two M7's and came from a Nikon FnT to Fm3A background and find the camera systems are a very nice complement to each other.<br>

The 50mm Summicron is a very good lens and after you spend some time, you can decide on whether to purchase the best Leica lens of all, the 35mm Lux ASPH.-Dick</p>

<p>It is an authorized Leica dealer. Thanks for all your responses. I'm going to think about it.</p>

<p>Wow, where's the love?? The M7 is fantastic. I have several different vintages of the M cameras (M3 to M6, MP and M7), and I believe the M7 is the best. I would disagree with Josh that the M6 and M7 are totally different. It's true that the M7's shutter is electronic in some ways, but not others. It is electronically timed, but it is still a cloth mechanical shutter system very similar to the one in the M6. It's really a trade-off that you have to figure out for yourself. The M6 is mechanically timed and can work at all speeds without batteries. The M7 is electronically timed (which makes it more accurate and consistent) and can use AE, and still works without batteries at 1/60th and 1/125th. You also get the shutter speeds in the VF in AE mode, and it will count down the time in seconds in the VF for long exposures in AE, and count up for long exposures in Bulb. Very convenient if you use long exposures...<br>

<br /> I have found the meters in the M6 and M7 to be identical in performance... Since they are accurate center-weighted meters, they are repeatable and predictable. Point it at something you want at 18% grey and you will get a perfect exposure. If you don't, you won't.<br>

I do have to say I think the battery and electronic thing is really an overblown issue. It just takes double the number of the same battery that's in the M6, and they last a very long time. Not many people walk around without batteries in the M6, as you probably don't get an M6 if you don't want a meter (might as well get an M3, M2, M4 or M-4P for less money). The batteries are tiny and you could fit 15-20 in a canister of film...carrying a spare is not difficult. <br /> As for the prints? The 50mm lenses are superb. A Leica shot well captured on slide film or black and white film can be print at 20x24" without problems -- it will not be super sharp when you stick your nose in it, but it will look great to any observer who takes even one step back.<br>

Here are some M7 and 50mm shots...taken this fall on Kodachrome 64...my last roll...<br /> <img src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/last-kodachrome-006.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/last-kodachrome-015.jpg" alt="" /><br>

<img src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/last-kodachrome-001.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>In a few words, go for it. </p>

<p>I shoot with M7...get the serial number before you buy because some had various problems, such as unsealed viewfinder allowing dust into the works. Does it have the upgraded MP finder and upgraded DX reader?...These are questions to ask as an informed buyer - otherwise go for it.</p>

<p>Paul, do you have any serial number data for the upgrades? I don't know the serial number of this one yet, but I am planning to go to the camera store tomorrow to take a look at it.</p>

<p>From <a href="http://www.cameraquest.com/mguide.htm">CameraQuest</a>:</p>

<p><strong>"M7's from 2885000 are said to have the improved MP type finder"</strong></p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>the main problem with a 50mm is that the viewfinder isn't optimised for one (the only one that is, is on the M3) so you have a 50mm frame with a load of wasted space round it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I differ from this view of Josh's, because I find that space not 'wasted' but indeed very useful, especially in changing situations such as street photography, when you can see what's happening outside the frame, and likely to come into the picture. Not like the tunnel vision of an SLR, where one can get a surprise intrusion and miss the shot. I have an M3 and it took just a few moments to adjust when first using an M6, but then realy liked it. When I bought a 9cm Summicron for the M3, there I was again, with the space around the working image frame, and even more with the Hektor 135. It works for me very well thanks.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Leica M7 and 50mm lens starter kit any good?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>"Starter kit" My god .. (deep sigh) Haven't we been spoiled.</p>

<p>I traded all my Nikon manual focus equipment for a Leica M system.<br /> I am very satisfied, so I would strongly advise you to go for it!</p>

<p>The early rangefinder's are not really a problem as the M6 has the same rangefinder, in rare situations you get a flare that will make it a little harder to see the alignment in the rangefinder, doesn't happen that often and you learn to find something to focus. I would not use that as a reason not to buy the camera if it is in really good condition and it's at half-price and from a reliable vendor like you say. 50 Summicron is a great lens and even though I use the 35 as my main lens I have one and would not get rid of it. But you can always sell it and pick up a 35 if you want. Also, if the 50mm frame is too small for you, you can find a magnifier. I use one for the 50 and it works great, but not really essential. In short, I'd go for it!</p>

<p>Have no experience with M7, so can't help you there. I've owned and foolishly got rid of three M3s and now have only an M6 with MP modification. Before I bought the M6 I solicited lens opinions from two vetersn Leica shooters. Both advised me that if I could afford only one good lens, it should be the 50mm Summicron f/2.<br>

I did and get great satisfaction out of the combination.</p>

<p>I never shoot AE, if I can avoid it. I have the Nikon F3 as well as the M6. I prefer the M6 to the M7 as I do not need AE. There are plenty of M6s around that are like new. Leica users tend to baby their cameras and you certainly can find an M6 at a more reasonable price than an M7. As far as lenses are concerned the general rule is that there is no bad Leica lens just that some are better than others and all are expensive and some more expensive than others. The 50mm Summicron V3 or V4 are exceptional. The 35mm Summicron V3 & V4 have been rising drastically in price since the introduction of the M9. As far as quality is concerned...unbelieveable. I can not address the slide issue on the M7 but I did shoot up my last Kodachrome with an M6...no problem.</p>

<p>Steve, I've used both the 35mm version 4 (Midland design) and the more recent 35mm Summicron ASPH designed in Solms. There is nothing that beats the ASPH in my experience in terms of wide open resolution and microcontrast, to the corners, as well as overall performance. I don't know about the recent 21 and 24 Leica f1.4 or f3.8 lenses, but the 35mm f2 ASPH is possibly Leica's best lens. If it wasn't for the bo-ke characteristics of the version 4 (beautiful, better than the ASPH), I don't believe it would sell for more than the prior non-Midland designed versions. It is a cult lens and the price is reflected in that. However, these are subjective opinions (as most are I guess).</p>

<p>If you don't shoot AE, there's little reason to buy a M7. However I use one and for shooting, I'd rather use it in AE than any other Leica by far. Especially on the street. I also have and use an M3 and M6. M7 is my first choice for a user Leica camera. It's just how you like to work, but I like to be able to know that I can change DOF very fast and know while I do it if I have enough shutter speed. Also it's very fast changing from bright light to open shade very quickly if you don't want to guess.</p>

<p>What depressing responses! Where is the love, indeed! I have an M7 and a Summicron 50. This is the best combination of body and lens in the Leica film stable. Period. At half price for NIB?<br>

The M7 with the .72 magnification and a 50mm lens is a match made in heaven. I own an M3, an M5, and an M6 as well. The M7 gets the most use - 80-90%. I only use the others when they need fondling. Especially the M5 - I really love the mechanical feel of the M5.<br>

My M7 has a serial number greater than the oft-mentioned 2885000 and it did <strong><em>not</em></strong> have the improved viewfinder and had the mechanical DX reader. I sent it to Leica to have it converted to the optical DX reader (a free upgrade still) and I had the MP viewfinder swapped in ($660.00, including adjusting the meter, the shutter and calibrating everything, complete CLA, etc, etc.) The view through the finder is great - clean sharp bright. The frame lines are luminous and distinct and thin - not a big fat distracting frame like on the M3 (I got to be one of the few people in the universe not in love with that viewfinder.)<br>

If the camera you are looking at does not have these upgrades, you may want to factor this in. My M7 was built in 2002, so I wanted it upgraded and restored to good-as-new. I sent it for the aforementioned work in December and got it back last week. So factor that in as well - 11 weeks. You also don't really need these upgrades. My non-MP finder flared a lot less than my M6 classic. In fact, I had to work really hard to make it flare - something that I could easily force my M6 and even my M3 to do (though rarely). The M5 is fairly flare resistant, also. Like the M3. The mechanical DX reader gave me no problems, other than grabbing the film canister a little too tight most of the time. I like the new optical reader. If I were to design the M7.1, it would not have a DX reader at all and everything else the same.<br>

The meter is fabulous. AE is highly reliable and very sensitive in incredibly low light. The AE rocks - makes all the difference in the world. My M7 is always on AUTO. If you get good results with the F3HP AE and slides, you'll improve your ratio of keepers by some margin. Google Leica M7 reviews and read up on them. Particularly useful and informative reviews are from Luminous Landscape, Photoethnography, Andrew Nemeth, and Steve Huff and even Ken Rockwell.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>What depressing responses!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You, Hil, have obviously not read everything, or much at all. ;-)</p>

<p>Hil and everyone, thanks for your response. I do in fact very much enjoy shooting in AE mode with my F3HP, and am sure I will enjoy it with the M7 as well. Still haven't made it down to the camera shop to take a look at the camera yet. May get there this weekend.</p>

<p>At half price, you should just buy it!</p>

<p>I also shoot the Nikon F3 and the 50mm f/1.8 AI, which is one of Nikon's better 50mm lenses.<br>

The rangefinder lenses that I've tried far outclass the SLR lens (Summicron collapsible from the 50s, CV Heliar 50 3.5) in terms of contrast, resolution, and lack of distortion. So far, I'm shooting screw mount lenses on a IIIG, as my M7 is with Leica getting serviced (see below).</p>

<p>I do love the F3's fast and accurate shooting on the Auto exposure mode. I also have the MD4 on the F3, so it is a very fast shooter.<br>

I used the F3 for my last roll of Kodachrome, and now I'm going through my last E100Gx with it.</p>

<p>I've just purchased a 2003 vintage M7 to recreate the same speed of shooting of the F3 in a smaller package using small, sharper lenses. Mine did not have the MP finder upgrade. This is now a $550 upgrade at Leica NJ, USA. The DX electrical reader to optical reader upgrade is free. As a consolation for the high price of the MP finder upgrade, they will do a CLA at no extra cost. If you really want to live in the manual M6 TTL mode, the M7 has identical manual controls.</p>

<p>I've been looking at the 35 ASPH myself, only because I prefer a wider view than 50mm. However, the 50 f/2 Summicron in your kit is a great lens, and it will be sharper than almost any other 50mm lens out there.</p>

<p>An extra benefit of the M7 and M6TTL is that you can get TTL flash control, high speed synch (flash sych to 1/1000 shutter speed) and second shutter curtain flash synch with the right Metz flashes and the 3502 SCA module.</p>

<p>"If the camera you are looking at does not have these upgrades, you may want to factor this in."<br>

If you purchase from an Authorized Dealer and with Valid Warranty, the cost of both upgrades is zero. My second M7 was purchased this way and upgraded for zero cost and also recovered because the tech didn't like the covering. It was also CLA'd at the time. i also paid an additional $150 for upgraded Passport Protection from ANYTHING for 5 years. Can't go wrong with that deal.</p>