A day with an MP, M6TTL, M7 and M4

[jay_.]

Yesterday I had a chance to handle a friend's MP for an entire day

alongside my M4, late # M6TTL and M7 (all 0.72x). I noted some

interesting things:

 

Finder flare: I subjected all four to a maximum-flare-inducing

situation using both flood, fluorescent and sunlight. The M6TTL and

M7 whited out equally, so whatever Leica said about the initial run

of M7's new finder coatings being flare-reducing was bull.

Interestingly, in the same orientations it was possible to get the MP

to exhibit patch whiteness too, but not nearly as much and nowhere

near as easily. More interestingly with the M4 it was impossible to

see any evidence of flare whatsoever, so whatever Leica did to the MP

is definitely not a total reversion to the earlier rangefinder

optics. I should also say that when the M7 and M6TTL were

in "whiteout position", a *very* slight rotation of the camera

against the eye (i.e. changing the angle of view)of perhaps 1 degree

completely eliminated the whiteout. I also noticed that whenever I

manipulated the M6TTL and M7 into position where the patch whited

out, one side or the other of the framelines (50mm and shorter)

disappeared, but as long as both sides of the framelines were in

clear view, I could not get the patch to go white, period. Like Marc

Williams in an earlier post, I also noted that the MP's framelines

had a tendency to light up much brighter than the other bodies and I

found it somewhat distracting. But additionally I noted that in

comparison to the other bodies the rangefinder patch of the MP was

always noticeably dimmer; however it was not so dim as to be a

problem.

 

Body finish: The body I was using was a chrome one. In comparison

to my friend's M6 Classic, the MP chrome was very close but it looked

a lot nicer thanks to the cleaner lines due to the lack of the

plastic strap rub strips, plastic winder tip, and red logo, plus

the "Leica" engraved on top where the M6 has a large blank expanse of

chrome. Compared side-by-side with an M4 however, nobody could

honestly say the MP has the "old" quality finish, and the engraving

on the M4 is also nicer and there's more of it. The body covering

itself is another issue. To the touch it's a little grippier--in

fact it feels a lot like those stick-on strips they put in the bottom

of bathtubs. It looks shinier in person than in the pictures, and

resembles the old crinkle finish used on the Visoflexes and the

original TOOUG table-tripod. And on this sample the piece on the

back flap didn't match exactly, it was a slightly different grain and

not as shiny.

 

Mechanical feel: Comparing the wind-on feel neither I nor my friend

could feel any significant difference between the MP and the M6 or

M7, which were very slightly "notchy" compared to the M4 (CLA'd by

DAG), which has a very much silkier wind-on feel, we came to the

conclusion that any slight difference in feel between the MP and M6

and M7 was likely due to the different feel of the solid wind lever.

The *sound* of the MP winding was identical to the M6 and M7 so far

as we could hear in a quiet room. They were all slightly hollow and

metallic where the M4 was more like the proverbial "well-oiled

machine".

 

Shutter sound: We couldn't detect any significant difference between

any of the mechanical bodies. The M7 of course lacks the escapement

buzz and jangles at the slow speeds. In low ambient noise

environments at speeds below 1/30 the M7 is clearly the choice if

you're aiming for unobtrusiveness...but it's not silent of course.

 

Shutter accuracy: Using the digital tester, the MP, M4 and M6TTL all

exhibited the same shot-to-shot variances at each marked speed, and

the same 1/3 to 2/3 stop variation between the left and right edges

of the frame at all speeds, with the greatest variation occuring at

the higher speeds. If the MP really has a resdesigned shutter or

braking geometry, it certainly isn't detectable with test equipment.

It's no worse than the M6, but no better. As a side-note, the M4 was

the closest to marked speeds throughout the range; however I would

consider this a tribute to Don's expert adjustment rather than

anything in the design. The M7 as expected is dead-on from top to

bottom--though the side-to-side variance still exists.

 

Wind and Rewind hardware: I saved the best (or worst) for last

because I did not want to lead off with something I've been

consistently negative about the MP even before I'd had one in my

hands. The solid winder and knob rewind did not fail to bring back

unpleasant memories of my years with a pair of M2's. The plastic

pivoting tip is more comfortable and secure especially when there's a

little perspiration on the thumb but it's not a big deal and in any

case swapping it for an M6-style wind lever would be a simple thing

(ditto for the preview lever which is smaller and a little less quick

to operate, especially pulling it in the direction away from the lens

when a 28 or 90 is mounted, as the tip rests very close to the

lens). The rewind knob is the real bone of contention. Turning it

clockwise left-handed is less natural than with the right, so perhaps

part of my disgruntlement comes from my southpaw bias, but the M4-M7

crank was a lot quicker for my right-handed friend as well and it was

the one thing even he wished Leica had stopped short of when

accomodating the retro-look. In its defense, the knob does not

protrude beyond the body edge and rub against the neckstrap like the

crank-style rewind does, nor does it slip out of your fingers and

recoil. Interesting note, the metal crank tip of the M4 has much

less tendency to slip than the plastic one of the M6 and M7.

 

Conclusion: I can see where Leica felt the need to clearly

differentiate their mechanical M from the M7, which is physically a

near-clone of the M6TTL, and while they were at it they were probably

wise to try and score as many points as possible with the "fondlers"

who after all do comprise a sizeable segment of their market. The

result is as fine a camera as the M6 Classic, with some praiseworthy

improvements: the rangefinder optics and the 3-diode metering; and

some praiseworthy subtractions from the TTL: the questionably-useful

TTL flash and its resultant 2.5mm height increase which once again

makes the nice, small Visoflex-II and its diopter-adjustable small

prism finder usable. Whether you believe all the hype or not, in

terms of finish and finesse, it doesn't come up to the level of the

M2-M3-M4 and once you get them side-by-side in your hands no amount

of marketing prose is going to camouflage that fact. But not

everyone is in to 35 year-old used meterless cameras. IMO the best

thing about the MP is that Leica bothered to make it. It

demonstrates their commitment to keeping the M line alive, and that

will benefit those of us who pass on the MP as well you who spring

for it. But beware all you who do become MP owners, your

photography will be judged more harshly and held to a higher standard

than the rest of us, because we can always blame our inferior cameras

while you, possessing of Mechanical Perfection, have no excuses left

to fall back on ;>)

[sandy.]

Jay, I also have the four different M's in your test and your report is dead on. Too bad you cannot include a M6J in your line up, since that one purportedly has yet another rangefinder akin to the M3. Good job.

[paul hart]

Jay: thanks for this detailed report, which douses any smouldering fires of MP-lust I may have had.

 

It also confirms my less thorough researches in respect of rangefinder whiteout. There's a place in my house - near a window - where I can get my M6TTL and M7 to flare readily. However, no matter how hard I try, my M3 refuses to do such a thing.

[jo_l_cahane]

About M6J, mine is the most flaring prone of my M's

[steve_hoffman]

There is no light meter in the M3, M2 and M4, therefore no light leak because of the meter workings, therefore no flare. This is comparing apples and oranges!

[furcafe]

I also have a "flare spot" in my apartment, &, FWIW, I've found

that my M2's RF spot does white out a little bit (but not nearly as

completely as my M6 TTL), while my M3 does not flare @ all.

[sandy.]

Steve, where is the "leak" coming from?

[wbesz]

Thanks for your worthy report, much appreciated, and thanks Jay for

your comment on the likelihood that the lightmeter may be the cause

of the flare problem.

[wbesz]

Sorry for the slip up here (got distracted while typing). Thanks Jay for your detailed experience and thanks Steve for the potential lightmeter problem causing flare.

[sandy.]

<i><b>...no light leaks because of the meter workings....</b></i>

<P>Here is a link about viewfinder flare explained in great details. I can't find any mentioning about <i><B>light leak</B></i> anywhere. Someone please enlighten me!

<P><a src href="http://www.nemeng.com/leica/020b.shtml">http://www.nemeng.com/leica/020b.shtml</a>

[david_kelly1]

Thanks, Jay: I'll shall now be content to go on with my M3 until the moment arrives to hand it to my offspring -on my

deathbed, of course!................

[gary_ferguson1]

Without a mountain of scientific equipment evaluating viewfinder flare must be a fairly subjective exercise. However, in comparing an M3, one of the first x0.72 M7's (serial number 2778680), a very recent x0.58 M7 (serial number 2854438), and an MP I'd tend to agree with Jay's analysis but I'd also add one further point. I get the impression there is a difference in flare resistance between the "early" and "late" M7, it could just be happenstance but my guess would be that there is something in the story that the M7 is now shipping with the MP's viewfinder system.

[wbesz]

Gary, it would great to find out when this change over occured for the M7 (my M7 number is in-between). I wonder if anyone knows?

[h._p.]

>>More interestingly with the M4 it was impossible to see any evidence of flare whatsoever<<

 

That's interesting. I've always lusted after a M4 and now I've got another reason. :-)

[fotografz]

Well, a person looking for the smaller, more original sized M with

a meter has a couple of choices: a M6 classic or a MP. If you

want a black camera with the heft of being brass it's the MP.

More sensitive and reliable meter meter, a MP. A M without flare

it's the MP. (I disagree with jay, I could not under any

circumstances get the MPs rangefinder patch to white out). I did

detect a difference in sound when tripping the shutter, the MP

was more muffeled where the other Ms sounded more metalic

(not that that is any big issue with any M). I could care less about

the rewind mechanism. At a wedding I may care, but I won't be

using this camera at weddings. I use M7s.

 

In the end, Leica fans lamented the demise of the purely

mechanical, highly relable M, and Leica answered the call with a

pretty nice solution that keeps the tradition going. One can buy

an old M6 classic for a lot less, or if they want the improved

features covered above (if they see it that way, which I do

because I had a classic), prefer a camera with less stuff pasted

on it, and prefer a new camera where they know the history, and

has passport protection with a 5 year guarantee ...then they can

spring for the MP. To each his own.

[rgh]

Thank you Jay for the review and thoughts. I know you have not been an MP fan so to hear what you had to say, it seems an honest evaluation of the MP merits and comparisons to the other modern era Leica cameras. I've been thinking about an MP myself and the idea that its fit and finish and general refinements are better than the M6 was one of the reasons. I was hoping for a 'modern' M4.

 

The one M-series camera that was not compared, and I think it will be the one metered M camera I will stay with is the M5. Although there are the size and shape differences, the M5 is still a Leica, has a very bright and flare free finder, great 'spot meter' (the only M-series with one) and many other refinements, with a classic Wetzlar fit and finish. It has: shutter speeds in the viewfinder, the best shutter speed dial, the best film rewind system, selftimer, and an analog meter that gives you a better view of the actual light level, these are features that the M6/M7/MP don't have (yes, the M7 has the shutter speeds in ugly and distracting 'electronic neon red') As the years go by and Leicas come and take the 'deep (M)6', I am appreciating this camera even more. I wish the MP could have been the new M4 with a meter, but if you can get by the size/shape of the M5 it could be the best feature rich Leica rangefinder ever built.

[henry_ting2]

Is the MP's shutter button release point similar to the M6's (very low before it trips the shutter).

[phil_kneen4]

is this the same jay that couldn´t see any flare in his m6´s, and didn't hestate to tell us we were seeing things?

 

wanker - fondler

[karl_georg_wolf]

Jay, thx. for your LEICA-M-comparison ... Very interesting to read. There is a demo at my photoshop this week and I am already looking forward to compare your findings about the MP-camera with mine.

 

There was a question about a M7-serielnumber above: If you can trust the findings of a German forum-member on the LEICA-Co.-website the improved finder was installed after 2.850.xxx.

 

Best regards

[sandy.]

The only M series camera that I don't have currently is the M5. Not that it is a bad camera, but I think it belongs to a different genre. <P>So I took all my M's out and went through my most unscientific test for flare. I have my own test spot, the ceiling spot light...<P>I have the M1, M2 and derivatives, M3, M4, M6 and derivatives, M6J, M7, MP. I found that I can induce the M4 to flare to the point that I cannot properly focus with the rangefinder. The M3 is the best of the lot. So, they all flare, but as people in the auto industry would say,'<I>..it's a matter of the grease !</I>...'. The only M that absolutely does not, of course, is the M1. Zero flare, not even a trace! ;-)

[christoph_frick1]

Thank you for this report. I appreciate all this information: At some point I want to get a second body, and such info should help to make a decision.

 

Just one question: You write that you measure "1/3 to 2/3 stop variation between the left and right edges of the frame at all speeds". Shouldn't such significant inaccuracy be clearly visible in colour slides? -- Do these inaccuracies develop over time, with age of the shutter? -- I have to say, with my still fairly new M6TTL (from May 2002) up to now I have never observed any indication of different exposure between the left and right part of the frame (I use mostly slide film). In my first tests, I did observe that the 1/1000s was about 1/3 stop too long. Now, after it was in Solms for a repair of the meter, also the 1/1000s looks accurate.

[dan_brown4]

Thanks Jay, your report confirms to me that the MP is the best M

Lieca ever.

[jay_.]

<<I did detect a difference in sound when tripping the shutter, the MP was more muffeled where the other Ms sounded more metalic>>

 

Marc, your MP is a black paint and the one I used was chrome. I theorize that the coating of enamel might very well attentuate the sound coming through it. I don't have enough experience with black paint Leicas to say. You had a Millenium--any difference between it and the black-chrome TTL?

 

<<You write that you measure "1/3 to 2/3 stop variation between the left and right edges of the frame at all speeds". Shouldn't such significant inaccuracy be clearly visible in colour slides?>>

 

It should but it doesn't, and I was very curious as to why that is. Measuring the shutter at frequent intervals across the film gate I found that the variation is not linear. The very left and very right for about 2mm vary but for most of the central area the speed is fairly constant. Since about 1mm of the edges are covered by a slide mount, it's pretty hard to see. It's something I don't consider a problem in daily practice...like the rangefinder-patch whiteout, which for me takes a deliberate effort to induce, even now that I've learned how to do it.

[dan_brown4]

<I theorize that the coating of enamel might very well attentuate

the sound coming through it.>

 

How do I say it? Hmm, maybe I best be silent this time around.

[tommy_baker]

I'd like to hear what you have to say Dan. Really. Because I think it will cause much glee and gaffawingly good entertainment value for the rest of us. Please be forthcoming..