How much rain will an M6 reasonably take?

[steve_taylor3]

How wet could you reasonably expect to get an M6 before you got worried? Has anyone got theirs soaking and if so what happened (damage wise)? I ask becuase currently I am a bit wary about taking it out in the rain. With reflex cameras, all I had to do was make a cover out of a plastic bag taped to a lens hood, which worked well. But you can't do this with a rangefinder because of all the extra windows. Anyone have an ingenious solution to this?

 

<p>

 

Cheers in advance

[stefan www.randlkofer.co]

you also seem to suffer from these horrible wet weeks behind us here

in britain. this makes you think about all the negative impact of all

that rain. i think the only suitable camera for a winter in the UK is

a nikonos.

[karl_georg_wolf]

Do not worry andtreat it the same as you treat your reflexcamera.

Your LEICA will not put you down. I´am sure it will stand the

decribed condition even much better.

 

<p>

 

Best wishes

[geddert]

Wear a large rain hat with a brim large enough to cover the camera

from above (I know they look funny - but its the price you pay), and

wear a large jacket/trench coat that you can quicly and easily stuff

the camera under while not up at your eye.

[stefan www.randlkofer.co]

and don't even try to take pictures with an umbrella clenched with

any available Body part. this way i smashed my pentax mx onto a hard

rainy pavement in Kyoto. luckily it survived!

[steve_barnett2]

Your question is like asking 'how long is a piece of string?' It

depends. One drop of rain could theoretically work its way in

somewhere and the camera would need a rest to dry out. But my M6TTL

regularly gets wet, top, windows, around the shutter and wind on

lever, and the lens barrel. The only thing that I try to keep dry is

the front lens element. I have never had a problem and wouldn't want

the camera if I felt it needed cosseting. That said, I do carry a

6x6 piece of towel to dry it every now and then. I don't like the

idea of plastic bags as they actively hold any water that gets in

them , and cause condensation.

[steve_taylor3]

Thanks to Mr Barnett there - this was exactly the answer I was

looking for. What I wanted to hear was that the camera wouldn't flake

out given a reasonable drop of rain. I take it that you leave the

camera out overnight or something to let it dry out if need be.

 

<p>

 

Thanks again

[charles_mason]

I left my M6 out in a very heavy rainstorm last year (on the back

deck). When I picked it up the next morning, I actually poured

several teaspoons of collected water out of it.

 

<p>

 

I know you now expect me to tell you it worked like a charm

anyway, but...

 

<p>

 

It actually took about a $350 repair bill at Leica to fix. Meter quit,

winding felt completely unlubricated, etc. But it seemed a cheap

fix, actually for what I did. And no problems since. Lens was

also relubed (35mm summicron), and it is fine too.

 

<p>

 

So my answer is, the worst damage you might do is about $350.

In some cases, a photo in a rainstorm might be worth that to

you...

 

<p>

 

Keep dry!

[andy_piper2]

Steve,

 

<p>

 

My M4-P got 'fire-hosed' by a fountain jet. 'BAMM' right up the front!

 

<p>

 

It immediately showed fog in the finder - front and back. And some

water made it inside the rim of the bottom plate (but not all the way

to the film!)

 

<p>

 

I wiped off everything externally, took it home, and put it in a 100

degree F oven for a couple of hours, which evaporated the moisture

inside. It's worked fine ever since (6 months). There are some dry

'drip marks' on the inside of the front finder window - they don't show

up using the eyepiece, but I'll get them cleaned off the next time it

needs servicing for some other reason.

[john_elder1]

In 1995 I shot my M6 in pouring rain in Philly documenting "A Day

Without Art". There were at least 25 photogs at the beginning of the

day. The only 2 cameras still shooting at sundown were the 2 M6s

being shot by a friend of mine and I. The Autofocus cameras broke

down very quick. Some of the older Nikons lasted a good long time

into the afternoon. But at the end of the day only the leicas were

still shooting. Actually I was quite worried about my camera it got

very wet. The finder fogged just a little at the very end of the

day,still shootable. No damage to the camera. The lens needed to be

relubed. The camera is tough!

[alfie wang]

the camera will last longer than the autofocus Canons and Nikons

will. Even that new M7 too!

 

<p>

 

No doubt...

[Rob F.]

I think Charles' answer was very instructive. It shows that an M is

certainly not waterproof. A Rolex Oyster Submariner it's not.

 

<p>

 

I will take mine out in a light drizzle for a very limited time.

Then it gets wiped off carefully. A steady rain is out of the

question for me. With this policy, I've had no problem with my M2 in

40 years; or with the M6 in three.

 

<p>

 

It's best to be conservative about this. "He who puts his camera

away on a rainy day will have it to use another day."

 

<p>

 

How's that?

[mike dixon]

I've had an M3 in steady rain for up to about an hour with no

problems. I kept it under my shirt or jacket when possible, but it

still got quite wet. Don't know how the meter will hold up in the M6.

 

<p>

 

Shot below was made in cold, steady rain (turned to sleet and snow 30

minutes later). Sometimes staying dry just isn't an option . . . ; )

 

<p>

 

<img src="http://mikedixonphotography.com/reneecol28e.jpg">

[steve_barnett2]

Andy Piper mentioned that his M4-P misted up after getting wet. It

got me thinking that my M3 has also misted up after getting wet, and

I have had to take the top plate off to get the water marks of the

inside of the finder. But my M4-P has been just as wet as my M6

without a problem on many occasions. The difference may be that my

M4-P is a very late model and has the M6 style top plate and

windows. I wonder if these are less prone to letting water in than

earlier models of the M?

[kristian dowling]

I am sure that we've all heard survival stories about cameras

and their resistence to the elements. Well the fact remains that if

you are stupid enough to test an expensive camera based on

anothers (differing) experience(s), then you are asking for

trouble. Someone elses experience is just that, "someone

elses", and may not apply to you, expecially when it comes to

high risk factors such as rain and camera. The two never mix

unless it's a Nikonos!

[andy_piper2]

Kristian - but then we wouldn't have Cartier-Bresson's picture of a man

jumping over a puddle, among others.

 

<p>

 

All - If you get a chance - look for David Douglas Duncan's Viet Nam

book "War without Heroes". There is a whole series of pictures of a

Marine(?) AMTRAC column being simultaneously assaulted by an artillery

barrage and a tropical rain storm. Some of the images have static marks

because the shelling and lightning were so intense. Duncan was

obviously shooting in a near-waterfall with 2 M3s and a Nikon F.

Terrific pictures that we have only because DDD had the cojones (and

faith in his equipment) to shoot regardless of the weather (and other

falling objects).

 

<p>

 

As another Viet Nam photographer put it:

 

<p>

 

"The camera is just a tool - I use it like I would a toothbrush." --

Donald McCullin

[steve_barnett2]

Kristian, I think Steve Taylor wanted to know if his camera should

get wet, would it mean an automatic trip to Leica for repair. Nobody

is telling him to go swimming with it just to see if the predominant

advice is right or wrong. But sometimes it makes me wonder why

people have a Leica if all they can see is the expense. Its a camera

thats well made enough to go to the South Pole and the Sahara Desert

in the same day. Thats why its expensive. And unless you go

photographing in heavy downpours or underwater every time you go out

with a camera, then the Nikonos option for a rarely used piece of

equipment of limited practicality starts to look very expensive

indeed.

[andy_piper2]

Inspired by my previous response I just went back and looked through

"War Without Heroes".

 

<p>

 

All the Marines in that sequence were wearing ponchos. I would venture

that DDD ALSO had on a poncho - and kept his cameras under it when not

actually shooting. Just a bigger version of your plastic-bag idea,

Steve.

 

<p>

 

In his Photo Notes for the book he mentions that he kept his spare film

wrapped in plastic inside a medic's fanny pack strapped over his

tailbone - and that, except for enemy action, the biggest threat to

photography in SE Asia was, in fact, water.

 

<p>

 

So he took precautions - as well as pictures - in the wet.