Buying a shooter's Leica M

G'day everyone,

 

I am a student and I "work" part of the time as a photojournalist

for a local paper. Street and documentary photography are my main

interest. My Nikon SLR system serves me well for different types of

photography, but it doesn't quite fit the bill for a quiet,

unobtrusive, top-quality street shooter.

 

Most of the time I have thus used a fixed-lens Minolta 7s

rangefinder. It's a very nice camera, the Rokkor glass is extremely

sharp. I do however have a lot of gripes with the camera. 45mm is

not my preferred focal length (35mm is), it's a bit on the bulky

side, the controls are extremely fiddly (I have trouble adjusting

the shutter speeds each time, which means taking the camera away

from my eye, turning it around, forcefully twisting the ring (while

hurting my fingers), ... As much as I'd like to love this camera (it

was my first), it's not a good shooter. I considered my options -

Bessa's, Hexars, Zorkis or other LTM cameras, ...

 

I realised that if I'd buy anything other than a Leica M it would

just be a costly slow-down, for I know I would be upgrading to a

Leica M afterwards.

 

I was hoping you people could advise me as to what body to buy

exactly and possibly where I could find a lot of information. The

body I am looking at now is the plain M6 72. I don't need flash on

these cameras, I don't need aperture-priority, I don't need faux

ostrych leather, ... Let me formulate my questions a bit more

structured:

 

Firstly, what are the alternatives to the classic M6? Does the M6TTL

add any real improvements other than flash and an 'off'-switch? What

about the older models - M2, M3 and M4 - is there anything I am

missing by not looking at those? I would like a meter, but perhaps I

am overlooking any advantages of the older models. I'm not

exspecting you people to discuss each body in detail, so the next

question is...

 

Secondly, what would be a good site for information on Leica bodies?

I have trouble finding exact informations. Most 'reviews' of the

Leica M6 for example are very interesting to read, but do not

contain a lot of information about the M6. I have not yet had a

chance to handle one, I will certainly do so before buying, but I'd

like some information in advance anyway. For example, what

information does the viewfinder contain? I am not familiar with a

lot of rangefinders, but I was wondering if information regarding

aperture and shutter speed was visible in the viewfinder. Also, how

is the light metering indicated? Is it a match needle, minus and

plus symbols, ... What is the exact size of the M6?

 

As you can see, I have a lot of practical questions but I am

certainly not asking you to answer them all! Some good links would

suffice, although I would of course appreciate some personal input

on my possible choice of the plain M6 (are there any known problems

regarding reliability, and obvious disadvantages compared to

M6TTL, ...)

 

One last question, what would be a good place to buy an M6? I'm not

looking for a mint one. I don't mind scratches, small dings, paint

coming off - I'm a student on a budget and I want the best tool to

take photos, not a camera to put on a shelf. I will probably be

buying a 35mm 'cron asph or summilux to go with the body.

 

Sorry for the lack of structure and longwindedness of my post. I'd

be really gratefull if you could help me out. I've been a long-time

reader of this forum and have already picked up a wealth of

information here.

 

Thanks in advance!

Jonas<div></div>

If you're only into 35mm, the Konica Hexar is a street-shooter's dream, just as good as

camera, incredibly quick to use and a fraction of the price. There;s much info about it in

the archives, many people over at Street & Documentary use one too. Not to dis the m6, of

course, but the Hexar was really a Leica for the 90s...

Lots of questions, Jonas! I can only be brief and can't answer all your questions. For

information on the M6 and the entire M line, go to cameraquest.com, excellent site, and it

also contains info on lenses.

 

M6 is all you need, forget the ttl, unless you use flash. I started w/ an M2 and 'upgraded'

to an M6, although I would not call it a real upgrade. My M2 did not have a meter, but its

viewfinder was crystal clear and without flare. M2 contains no information in the

viewfinder--pure simplicity--while the M6 only tells you if the scene is under-, over-, or

correctly exposed via two little red diode arrows. FWIW, I really like the M6, in a year or

two I'll fix its occasional tendency to flare. A user M2 will run you as little as $600, but

you have to be patient, a nice M6 goes for around $1000 if you get lucky.

Andre - thanks for the heads-up. I will definitely have a more in-depth look at that Hexar RF. I should have mentioned that 35mm is my preferred focal length for most things, but I would use other focal lengths as well (especially in the long run - two lenses to start would be stretching my budget too far). Another thing is that I assume Leica are built more solid, and can take a beating. Cameras, for me, are just a tool to get the job done, and while I won't be throwing my camera around and in the mud, I won't be babying it either.

 

Juan, I'm sorry for all the questions :) But that looks like an excellent site, thanks! It looks as if I can find a lot of information there. Over here in Europe, the price difference between M2/M3's and an M6 seems to be smaller - I can get an M6 in used condition for 750-800 euros and an M2 for 550 I believe. This is just for local stores, and a lot depends on availability as well.

 

Thanks for the answers. I'm going to do some more research now! (and perhaps study a bit for my exams tomorrow, monday and tuesday...)

Mr.P, sorry if I am annoying you. I didn't obligate you to reply though... And yes, for me there is quite a difference between a 45mm and a 35mm (the difference between being able to take the photo I want, or having to step back, and probably fall over something behind me..). Besides being a student I also work parttime in a bank (and as a photojournalist for a really small newspaper, but not making a lot if any money of that, it's fun though and I enjoy doing it..). I have considered my options and budget and decided that I can afford a Leica and a 35mm lens for now.

With time and a thicker skin... I suspect you'll realize the amount of truth in Mr P's replies.

Sarcastic? Granted. Harsh? Given. Incorrect? No.<p>

I like to have the meter (and it's a good one) in camera. I don't care about TTL at all... there's

a big misconception out there that a non-TTL M6 won't meter through the lens. Of course it

does. The major difference is the shutter speed dial turns the (correct) direction.

Although a Leica isn't required for the shooting you describe, it is a good choice. Your choice of an M6 is perfectly fine, and coming from the Nikon, you'll like having the meter. The off switch from the TTL isn't required, set the shutter speed to B to shut off the meter. Get a TTL if you find an incredible deal, otherwise just get an M6.

 

Consider a cheaper, older 35mm Summicron (I know my version 3 was an excellent lens). Only get the Summilux if you need the extra f-stop or come across a great deal.

 

Buy based on price and condition. Consider that a well-used M6 may need a CLA (recommended about every 20 years, costs something like $250 or $300). If you have time, wait for the items you want to show up here.

 

Whatever you get, shoot lots and have fun with it.

Thanks Clyde and Nikos.

I'm still considering my options. Before buying anything, I will of course go into a shop, try it out, perhaps try to rent one, etc etc, but no shops nearby carry them now and that's why I wanted some information in advance.

The 35 Summilux would probably stretch my budget a bit too far, I guess that was wishfull thinking: I find myself shooting my Nikon lenses between f/1.2 and f/2 a lot of the time (unfortunately the optical quality leaves a lot to be desired in some situations..)

I was, by the way, not offended by Mr.P's post. I was merely expressing that I do not feel as if I need to justify my choices. It's hard for me to express nuances in English as it is not my mother tongue.

 

Thanks again. I have the information I wanted (and a good link!), I will now look further on my own - perhaps try to borrow or rent a Leica somewhere...

Dear Jonas,

 

Ignore the unpleasant replies. Like you, I can see a real difference between 45mm and 35mm, and you can safely ignore 'advice' about light leaks, wonky viewfinders and huge sorting-out costs: anyone who buys a defective Leica will normally have only himself to blame. I've owned probably 20 Leicas and used 20 more (I used to collect them before deciding I'd rather just take pictures; several of my friends are/were major collectors; and I review cameras for magazines).

 

In your situation I'd be inclined to buy from a dealer with a guarantee: buy cheap from private buyers only if you REALLY know what to look for, and preferably have return privileges. You're looking for a working camera, after all, not a toy. Cosmetically ratty Leicas from dealers can sometimes be surprisingly cheap.

 

I admit that buying a Leica is not entirely a rational decision, but nor is it completely irrational: it is easier to work with a camera you like. I like them; I've been using them since I was about 20 (Leica screw) and 24 (Leica M). I'm now 55.

 

Personally I'd go for an M6 over M6ttl because the M6ttl and M7 have shutter speed dials that go the 'wrong' way as compared with all earlier and later Leicas (clockwise for higher speeds on others, anticlockwise on M6ttl and M7).

 

Unmetered cameras can be metered (though not through-lens nor with in-viewfinder metering) via Leicameters or Voigtlander meters. The latter are non-coupled but I find them easier to use and more reliable.

 

Ultimately, though, there is not a lot that anyone can help you with. If you like Leicas, you'll be happy and get pictures that are as good as you can take. If you don't like them -- well, buy something else.

 

As for lenses, yes, it's all very well to say that it's the lens that matters; but a 35/1.7 Voigtlander is an excellent lens (I own one and have used it extensively). By all means replace it with a recent 35/1.4 Summilux if you feel the need/can afford it, but my own experience is that I prefer a pre-aspheric Summilux to both the 35/1.7 (which is probably a better lens, especially when it comes to coma) and the current aspheric (which is definitely a better lens) because it's smaller. Beyond a certain level (which cheap zooms fall below), better lenses don't make better photographers.

 

Cheers,

 

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com -- and the back page of Amateur Photographer magazine)

Jonas, one thing to keep in mind about the M6 TTL is that it was available with a .58

viewfinder, which some 35mm lens users prefer. The M6 Classic was not available with the .

58 viewfinder, as far as I know.

Great advice and welcome perspective from Roger.

Dear Goshi,

 

Sorry, I find it hard to muster any real sympathy for 'victims' who buy anything sight unseen on the strength of a vendor's description. That is victimhood by choice, not necessity. That's why I recommended buying from a dealer.

 

Remember: anything that seems too good to be true, probably is.

 

Cheers,

 

Roger

I'm wearing my gators now, so please Goshi Ton-someone else's shoe.

"If you like Leicas, you'll be happy and get pictures that are as good as you can take. If you don't like them -- well, buy something else."

 

More sage advice from a learned and respected author. "If your pictures are no good, try another camera".

Why not a nikon DSLR, which is much quieter, efficient, and easy to download/edit with you own PC. As far as I know of publishing industry, especially of local newspaper/magzines, majority of them using DSLR for still photos then cut-and-paste into the media. The film-based equipment is almost absolete.

 

I think your question is "I want to get a Leica M, is anyone can back me up that it's a good idea?". If I am right about that, I am willing to back you up since M's are just simply nice. With a set on hands, you just simply feel good.

 

Once I owned four M bodies (M1/M3/M4P/M6TTL) and seven M lenses. I shoot around and they do produce very nice and beutiful pictures. Once I went to Hawaii and took sunrise shots at a beach close to Polynesian Culture Center. With a 35mm Summilux at various exposure/composition combinations, that is an unfogetble moment. I feels that I am really doing a photographers work with all passion and concentration. Most frames are carefully positioned, control the things you want to show, and try different exposure value just try to avoid any regret.

 

Sunrise is too short, but the brillant colors it reveals are always in my eyes, or I should say, in the frames that taken with the lovely leica set.<div></div>

Quieter? An SLR (d or not)? Ok then...

"Napa Valley, California. M4P, Elmarit-M 28mm f2.8. Fujichrome Provia. Exposure

unrecored. Nikon 4000ED. -- 853 x 640 photo)"

 

dude, learn to strip your exif data if you're going to make believe.....<div></div>

Hahahaha! ROTFLMAO... what a loser. Nice call Jonas

Goshi Tonyorshu

 

I think "Ghoshi" is pulling our legs so to speak. Sound out his name and see what you come up with. "go sh-t on your shoe". He is obviously a troll trying to start arguments and get people exercised at each other. Don't take the bait.

Jonas, if the sound of your Nikon is the main problem, you might want to listen to an F6, which is almost as quiet as a Leica M and takes the lenses you already own, so the cost would be about the same as agood M6 and 35mm lens.

In my opinion you should not rule out the M5 without due consideration, as many do. For practical shooting, it has certain advantages over any other M. Take a look at <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0050Lr">this thread</a>.

Dear Goshi,

 

I can only assume that you are deliberately misunderstanding.

 

I see a significant difference between

 

'You will take better pictures with a camera you are happy with'

 

and

 

'If your pictures are no good, buy another camera'

 

If you do not, I am not sure I can make myself any clearer, for which I apologize.

 

Are you by any chance related to a Mr. Malcolm Tentt (to whom I apologize if I have mis-spelled his name)?

 

Cheers,

 

Roger

Thanks for all the answers!

 

One thing I should have mentioned is that starting from next year, we'll have a Nikon DSLR at the paper (and I'll use my own lenses), so that's not so much of a problem. I want a 'street shooter' for the things that don't need to get published next day or things for my own portfolio, ... I like digital because of it's workflow, but I'm not yet ready to give up that beautiful Tri-X grain, the rich tonality of FP4+ or the overall 'wow'-factor of EFKE 25.

 

Roger, I will certainly look more in-depth before buying any 35mm lens. Thanks for the advise on size and optical quality.

 

I will certainly have a more indepth look at the M5. I didn't think much of it as there was not a lot of attention for it, nobody seemed to care for it. After reading part of your essay and the comments on the cameraquest site, it seems as if I was wrong!

 

Thanks again. As a final note, I'd like to say that after scanning my film, it has happened in the past that EXIF data from a digital camera got attached. I don't know how this happened. Perhaps the gentleman above was trying to fool us, perhaps he was genuinely mistaken; but I certainly would not rule out computer error.

 

Thanks!

Before you do anything in the Leica direction, get yourself a Konica Hexar Silver (NOT the Konica Hexar RF). The Hexar Silver is an autofocussing VF camera with a fixed, non-interchangeable 35mm/f2 lens of superb quality. These are available used. If you're not happy with it, sell it and go Leica.

"More sage advice from a learned and respected author. "If your pictures are no good, try

another camera"."

 

I dunno Jay, after seeing the pics you posted here, perhaps you ought to try it. Couldn't hurt.