Ideal Leica M Body

[paul_keller]

<p> What would be your Ideal M configuration?<br>

For me it would be the dimmensions of the classic M3, 2, 4 etc. with lower deck height. It would also contain AP auto exposure and manual exposure with dual matched needle metering exactly like a Nikon FE. The shutter feel would be in the M2 M3 character. It would have the canted rewind crank. Eliminate the lens frame preview lever and retain the film loading style of the later bodies. The viewfinder would only show the frame of the lens being used and the magnification would be selectable 58, 72, 91.<br>

Oh, and could I have a choice between film and FF Digital bodies?<br>

What do you think (without getting beyond plausible reality)?</p>

[eoinmurphy]

<p>The MP just the way it is, except I would change the direction of the shutter speed dial, if that is not too radical.</p>

[Troll]

<p>The M4, but with corners in the projected framelines, like the M3. It would be nice if they were closer to 100% of the image on the negative at distances, say 10 feet, not at 3 feet.</p>

[vilk_inc]

<p><em>corners </em>in the M3? :)</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>I'd buy it. What about getting rid of the rangefinder altogether, and go with a very good LED light that tells you when the segment you're focusing on is in focus, or reads out the distance? What about beefing up an X100?</p>

[rossb]

<p>The M7 is already perfect. </p>

[SCL]

<p>I'd take my M4, add diopter correction in the eyepiece, crank up the shutter speed to about 1/8000 and have it do either film or digital (a la the "Silicon Film" concept - but in reality, not fiction).</p>

[jeffrypittman]

<p>Silver MP but I like the M2 almost as much. Never owned an M4 but I want one!</p>

[paul_keller]

<p>Picked up a beautiful M2-R recently for way under it's value. I intended to sell it to help fund an M9 purchase, but now I understand how Frodo must have felt. I need to throw it into Mt. Doom..........but I can't.</p>

[asimrazakhan]

<p>not that i'm a narcissist... but how about a SELF TIMER! otherwise, an MP with aperture priority.</p>

[ilkka]

<p>M9 in a M6 size body at quarter the price (of M9).</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>M6 + Rapidwinder or Leicavit.</p>

[john_boyle3]

<p>The M2 - just as it came from Wetzlar.</p>

[wentbackward]

<p>M6 0.85x and 35 cron. It's already 90% of what I need. on top TTL would be nice, and MP would be self-indulgent.</p>

 

[mukul_dube]

<p>I'd like an M7 with a 0.85 finder and a <em>much</em> lower price. Since, however, I am in India and cannot get all I want, not just because I am chronically close to broke, I am content with the M3 I found two years ago. The M3 I found in 1985 kept me happy for seventeen years: so there may well be something in that particular model.</p>

<p>I do not mean to smash dreams with realism, of course; but I shall spend time on this sort of thing only if Leica become aware of my existence and consult me.</p>

[Bill Blackwell Images]

<p>For a film camera - think M2 with a built-in meter.</p>

<p>The LHSA MP3 was about as close to perfection as Leica has gotten so far. </p>

 

[john_lovelace]

<p>I'm glad that a couple of voices ahead of mine touted the M6. I've had three M3s and finally wearied of wasting so many shots because of no built-in light meter other than the optional add-on. M6 with its amazingly accurate, prompt spot meter solved that problem, and I had the rangefiner MP-adapted to make its frames almost as bright as those unbeatable ones on the M3. </p>

[Richard Williams]

<p>I tried creating a design on the Leica 'a la carte' site once, which apparently allows over 4000 combinations of the various options. It came out like a black M6.</p>

[cody_moore1]

<p>I would have to say the Leica M5. Incredibly accurate meter, easily accessed shutter speed dial, and I love how it feels in my hands. I took mine on a trip to Copenhagen last month and I could not ask for a better camera.</p>

[mike_z2]

<p>Agree 100% about the FE needle-matching display. That is the most convenient and intuitive meter display I've ever used. </p>

[rgerraty]

+1 for the M5. I can really wrap my hands around that camera, it is easier to keep still and level and I like having the

self-timer. I reckon it looks great. I have the ZM 50 C Sonnar on it, with the substantial hood, and it's a very balanced

combination in look and feel.

[jason]

<p>The best body for me, is the M3. Every other viewfinder is lousy, getting worser and worser with "progress". All the in-efficient lens frames.The M2 could be adjusted for 28mm. In the M3 add a lens in the viewfinder, to work like the goggles!Metering a plus a-la-M6, but maybe a system like Pentax MX with green diodes and orange and red. That way shutter speed showing, metering way more accurate than Nikons Fe or even the top pro film boxes(F2,F3} etc.<br>

A add on back for digital. The back does come off. Might be thicker, but not impossible.If Leica doesn'nt make a less expensive body, the Nex or similar look ideal esp with an adapter the reverse of a Tele-extender{C}.That way making full frame images without magnification..the 35mm is a 35mm. The 50mm a 50mm not 75mm.</p>

[jason]

<p>The best body for me, is the M3. Every other viewfinder is lousy, getting worser and worser with "progress". All the in-efficient lens frames.The M2 could be adjusted for 28mm. In the M3 add a lens in the viewfinder, to work like the goggles!Metering a plus a-la-M6, but maybe a system like Pentax MX with green diodes and orange and red. That way shutter speed showing, metering way more accurate than Nikons Fe or even the top pro film boxes(F2,F3} etc.<br>

A add on back for digital. The back does come off. Might be thicker, but not impossible.If Leica doesn'nt make a less expensive body, the Nex or similar look ideal esp with an adapter the reverse of a Tele-extender{C}.That way making full frame images without magnification..the 35mm is a 35mm. The 50mm a 50mm not 75mm.</p>