SLR Compliment to M6

[jfm]

Hello All,

I was curious about which SLR equipment you would suggest to

compliment the M6. I have been shooting with the M6 for a year now,

and achieved wonderful results, in addition to the exploration of my

creativity. The SLR would be nice in certain situations, however, and

I am especially interested in the Leica SLR's.

Comments please.

all best,

JM

[phillip_p]

I would think an R6.2 would be a good choice if you can find one. Otherwise an R8 or R9 would be OK.

[al_kaplan1]

Either the Leicaflex SL or SL2 would compliment the M cameras. Everything made since then is too fiddley, too much electronics overly sensitive to humidity and moisture, the black finish over zink is crappy and tends to bubble and blister over time, they're junk. They don't have the Leica "feel".

[john15]

The Nikon FM3A is about the same size&weight as the M6;45mm P lens is as well made as Leica stuff and very compact. AE plus mechanical for all speeds.

[paul_sharratt]

Jeffrey -- I have an M3 with 25mm VC, 35mm, 50mm, 90mm and 135mm. On the SLR side, since I've owned Nikon lenses for over 20 years, I have an FM2, F3 and N90S. I use the N90S for days when I want to use flash fill, F3 for night cityscapes using wide angle lenses when I need to precisely frame the image (otherwise N90s). With the N90s I use the 20-35 (great lens!) 28-105 (ok after 5.6 and light to carry) and 80-200 (very sharp but a bit heavy). I'm also considering replacing the N90s with the N80 to keep the weight down. Seriously consider a newer SLR with a pop-up flash and a zoom - the carrying weight is suprisingly low and shooting at 5.6 and above will yield sharp results - and the flash is very useful in many different situations. I'm not sure of the weight of Leica SLR but I'm always looking for ways to lighten my load because I tend to walk around cities or hike trails with my camera gear. I'd suggest renting a couple different SLR's to see which one you feel most comfortable using.

[giles_poilu]

An often asked question - my answer is to go for the most tecnically advanced, highly specced SLR available. Generally a mid to high range Canon (my choice) or Nikon. Leica make the very best rangefinder cameras but I am afraid the big two have them licked when it comes to SLR's.

 

If you want an SLR for those situations when an M is lacking then surely super quick AF with tracking, accurate AE, 5 frames/sec + autowind, an enormous range of superb lenses (inc image stabilization), a huge range of macro and flash accessories etc, etc is better than a very manual R9 with a very limited MF spec, poor distribution and back-up and tiny secondhand market.

[william_patterson]

You didn't tell us what type of photos you plan to take with the SLR, so it makes it a little difficult to make a recommendation.

 

If you want to take some action photos utilizing fast autofocus, then you will probably want to look at Nikon or Canon. If you want to put your camera on a tripod and take landscape photos, then just about any SLR will do (so would your M6).

 

It comes down to what camera feels the best in your hands to take the type of photos that you want to take.

[jean3]

I second Giles. A manual SLR is nice, but for me is to close to the M to justify the hassle of a second system. An M is not ideal for a lot of photographic tasks, like macro, working with long teles, high speed flash sync, (and some more stuff without any doubt). An high-tech bells&whistles image stabilizing brain fading auto everything seems perfect to me - for these things. I would not haul such a camera "just in case", or threaten innocent people with it.

[Robin Smith]

Jeff

 

The R6 or the R6.2 really are the best SLR analogs to the M6TTL - they are pretty well the same in terms of operation and they are manual and small. The meter is more useful than the M6s too. Otherwise the older SL and SL2 are recommended (see earlier threads). If you buy s/h R lenses then it need not break the bank. Other suggestions that come to mind are the Nikon F3 or the Nikon FM2 or FM3a, but of course they do not have the Leica optics. Contax S2 is possible too. If you want a high tech camera then look around and take your pick from Nikon, Canon or Minolta etc. etc.

[karl_yik1]

I would go for a Contax SLR (RTS2, S2, RX) and a set of Zeiss lenses , I think they handle much better than all of the Leica R bodies I have tried. The Zeiss Lenses are cheaper and perhaps of equal quality or better than the Leica equivalents.

[fredlee70x7]

Agreed with Karl unless you're looking for a AF SLR. I previously used Nikon F3HP w/. a set of AIS manual lenses. After handling a Contax ST (discontinued) and owning a Contax G2 w/. 45/2, I immediately fell in love with the high quality of Contax cameras and Zeiss optics. There is nothing to compare when you own lenses made by the two best German lenses makers (although current Zeiss lenses for Contax is made in Japan). S2 is a fabulous little mechanical camera but I'll suggest the RX (recently discontined but still available) which is more advanced and more balanced with bigger lenses, like 35/1.4 or 85/1.4. A set of 28/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/1.7, 85/2.8 and 135/2.8 are compact and perfect for the S2. Prices are very reasonable. If you get the RX and you want more exotic optics, then the 21/2.8, 35/1.4, 85/1.4 and 180/2.8 are top-notched. All these lenses are equal of Leica R's if not better at cheaper price.

[ralph_barker]

I agree with Giles and others on this. Go for the SLR with the most advanced features supported by the largest pool of second-hand gear - either Nikon (my preference) or Canon, both of which have some excellent glass (along with a few dogs). The nature of your SLR work (e.g. wildlife in snow and ice vs. high-energy model shoots) will determine whether to go with high-end automation features (e.g. F5, F4s, N90, N100) or toward the more-manual models (e.g. FM3, F3HP).

 

The Zeiss lenses in the Contax system are very nice, but Contax, like Leica, is behind the feature curve on SLRs.

[art waldschmidt]

I used a Leicaflex SL for many years along with an M5. For me, the SL was the perfect compliment - everything I wanted, with nothing unnecessary to get in the way. Wish I still had it!

 

If your priorities are size, weight, and build integrity, you might also want to look at some Olympus OM's - I use an OM4T (the aperture values run contrary, different direction, to Leicas, however).

The 4T is, sadly, battery dependent however - and that is something you might also wish to consider. I guess my first vote would go to the SL - they really don't build them like that anymore!!

[al_kaplan1]

The thing nobody touched on is what you meant by "compliment the M6". My own use of the Leicaflex/Leica R system was always as a compliment to the M system. I used it for macro and long lens work. When I had an assignment that required it, the 'flex body sported a 180/2.8 Elmarit, everything shorter handled by M cameras. On rare occasions I had a 280 and 400 with me, and maybe a second 'flex body. I never did buy a Macro-Elmarit because I was quite happy with my 65/3.5 Elmar. The macro work I do is almost always on a tripod or copy stand so even auto diaphragm isn't of much concern. I still dream of a Leica M body with a 2X magnified range/viewfinder with 90, 135 and 180 framelines! My Visoflex IIs can handle the macro.

[jay_.]

If by "compliment" you mean "do those things the M can't do conveniently", then as a Nikon manual and (formerly)AF and (formerly) Leica R user, I endorse the Canon EOS system. In particular the 1V with its 45-point AF and magnesium-alloy body.

 

However if by "compliment to M6" you mean "with the same kind of frustrating, quirky design idiosyncracies, exhorbitant cost and questionable reliability" then go for the Leica R, it won't disappoint you ;>)

[Troll]

VISOFLEX.

[lee_shively]

I use my Leica M6 for entirely different purposes than my Canon EOS camera equipment. The Leica is always used for black and white, candid, handheld photos as well as being the camera I can carry with me at all times. My Canon's are almost always used for color, generally with a Gitzo attached at the bottom and a zoom or long lens attached to the front. I love autofocus, especially when I'm using a long lens on a moving subject. My aging eyes absolutely DO NOT function like they did when they were 25 years old.

 

To me, that makes a motorized, autofocusing, autoexposing wunderplastik camera the perfect compliment to the Leica M6. I currently prefer Canon's but I used Nikon's for over 25 years and would be just as happy with that system.

[edshutter]

Leica R8 with 80-200mm f4.

[kenny_c.]

My suggestion is Canon EOS system. The reason is that they have the best AF/silent lenses choice and ready to go their digital cameras if you want. Also you don't have to use their top of line cameras. I found thier 600 series cameras, for example 630 or RT, are excellent and inexpensive. Also you can use Leica R-lenses with the adapter on the EOS cameraes. As for about the same size and weight of Leica M6, the Olympus OM4T and OM2n are good choice for hiking and travleing.

[jfm]

Thank you all for such wonderful responses!! I will take all of your information to heart. It is interesting that no one really suggested or recommended the R8 or R9 of Leica.

regards,

JM

[douglas_green1]

There's two ways you could take this: Either get an autofocus, auto-exposure, TTL-flash, very electronic camera with a vast reservoir of zoom and ultra-fast telephoto lenses (a Nikon N80 would come to mind, Canon has similar but I'm less familiar with the model #s) that can really do it's best in the few situations where an M-Leica was NOT designed to go, or you could get an SLR that is not all that dissimilar to a Leica in it's design philosophy, like an Olympus OM-1n or OM-4. Frankly, I own all of the above, so it's hard for me to say which one I'd most easily do without. But it's clear to me that Olympus SLRs are the most similar to use to Leicas, as this was one of the original design goals of the system, and they are brilliantly executed. But, other than Macro work, and work with long teles, they won't get you as much of a complimentary use as an autofocus SLR would. I personally don't feel that big a need for autofocus, but this is a personal decision you'll need to make.

[tim_noble]

Isn't the OM-3 mechanical?

[albert knapp md]

Jeffrey: I have an M7 with the 24, 35 and 90mm lenses and

would recommend a R8 along with a 28mm PC (for

architecture), 100 or 60 Macro and either the 180 f/2.8 or the

70-180mm f/2.8 with a 2x multiplier. Again, TAILOR your lenses

to your SPECIFIC needs !!

[rgh]

The Leicaflex SL of course. The fit, finish, lenses, and general feel are all LEICA. Its built like a tank, and balances well in the hand. A great spot meter, and is very smooth in operation. They are at bargain prices for lenses and body. Have Sherry Krauter at Golden Touch do a CLA and you have a camera that will last a lifetime or two.

[doug_landrum]

Jeffrey,

 

I think that the way you asked your question caused Leica R users to assume that you wanted a mechanical camera. If you want a camera that is essentially a manual exposure camera with a built in meter, then the R6, R6.2 or an older SL are for you. (I defer to the SL shooters on this - but I think SL's use mercury batteries that are difficult to replace.) If you want autoexposure with the latest functional whizbangs, a R9 would be for you assuming that you want to stay with Leica R. The flash functions on the R9 appear by specification to be great.

 

You need to ask yourself, what do I need a SLR for? If it is for very long or very short focus lenses? Macro? Do you want autofocus for sports? Do you want to spend the money for R lenses? Is the Leica edge in lenses important?

 

I use a R7 and R6. I had one time when the R7 locked up - fixed by Leica on warranty. I bang away mercilessly on both with a motor drive. Other than the initial bug - the R7 has been great. I have never had a problem with the R6.

 

A SLR is much more complex than a M. I recommend that you buy one with a warranty. The Leica warranty is one of the longest and most complete going.

 

Leica SLR gear is for the most part as bulletproof as you are going to get. The R lenses are outstanding and in my opinion have an edge on Canon and Nikon - maybe not by much though.

 

If I were to buy a SLR now, I would buy a new R9. But then I have R lenses from 19mm to 400mm. You can safely buy R lenses used - they last forever.

 

Just like the M lenses, there are R lenses that are good and R lenses that are outstanding. As you know from the M, Leica glass is expensive. The 400mm f/6.8 is outstanding and a great bargain - about $800.00 clean used. The 19mm (latest) is a terrific wide angle and expensive. The 50mm Summicron-R is my most used R lens and is also outstanding. The 100mm APO-Macro-Elmarit-R is simply unbelievable and on the high price side. The now superceded 180mm APO Telyt f/3.4 is also terrific, does not give up much to the new 180's but focuses slow and does not focus extremely close.

 

The lenses are the reason for the R system. The camera is a box to hold the film and the Leica boxes are well made and reliable. If you go Canon or Nikon I am sure you will be happy too - but get their premium lenses - expensive but a bit lower than Leica glass. Good Luck.

 

Regards, Doug