M6 TTL or M7?

[thomas_vanhaute1]

Ladies and gents,

 

After keeping myself from buying a Leica for years, I finally succombed

to the myth and borrowed some Leica equipment for a couple of weeks to

try out. First the distributor for Belgium lend me an M7 with a 28/2,0.

But this was a .85 version, so totally useless for a 28mm. I liked the

M7 immediately though. Then i got an M6 TTL .58 with the same lens.

Very nice handling camera, great viewfinder, and of course an

outstanding lens. I was happily surprised to find that prints actually

WERE sharper and richer in tones than ones shot with my usual Nikkors

(yes, i was a non-believer...).

To come to my question: I had always thought that, being an adept of

the aperture-priority system on my Nikons, an M6 would be a pain in the

ass, and that the M7 would be the final answer to my prayers.

When using the M6 though, i found that very quickly i became used to

setting aperture as well as speed before taking a picture. As a matter

of fact, when one enters a space, one can easily do a quick light-

check, set the right settings, and be ready for action. you only have

to make slight setting adjustments here and there, since light

conditions don't change that dramatically within one space (indoor or

out).

So, I thought to myself "this M6 thing works just fine, and handles not

that much slower than the AE on an M7, so why buy an M7 for 900 Euro's

more?".

I would like to hear some other thoughts on this matter from any of you

guys. Am i overlooking some of the benefits of an M7? Or will an M6 TTl

just do fine (as I think it will)?

 

Thanks for your thoughts!

[gerry_szarek]

IF the .58 mag is ok for you consider the Hexar RF, it has M7 attributes along with a higher flash sync, built in motor, and a 1/4000 top speed. The problems with it include dead batteries equals dead camera, and it is noiser than an M7 however most people still will not notice it. FYI the money saved will buy at least a 50 Cron and another lens.

 

I recommend you buy the camera in EX+ condition or new, the lenses can be bought used with the usual caviates.

 

GS

[cameron_sawyer]

The later M7 has an improved viewfinder (which can be retrofitted to an M6, by the way). M7 has brass rather than zinc top plate. M7 has electronic rather than mechanical shutter control -- much more accurate and will need less maintenance. And AE, as you point out.

 

That's about it. I am quite happy with my M6, other than the viewfinder, which I might upgrade. I do think that the M7 has some truly useful improvements over the M6, but not enough to be worth the $1000 price difference; at least not for me.

[jay_.]

This is a really hard call, not like choosing between an M6TTL and an MP where you've got to be nuts to spend an additional $800 (new to new)to *lose* the crank rewind, TTL flash and pivoting advance lever. The main advantage of the M7 to me, and the only reason I bought them, is that the electronically-timed shutter is more consistent than the mechanical one, and I notice a slight improvement in consistency of exposures on slide film which I shoot quite a lot. The AE is marginally advantageous, but since it isn't a matrix-type evaluative meter you've still got to know what your're pointing the meter at and how to interpret it, so unless the entire scene is within a stop of middle tone one way or the other you're not going to get away with just pointing and shooting.

 

The M7 works for me, but for $1100-1200 a mint- M6TTL would probably be my choice today. A year ago when I got my M7's I still didn't believe that digital was going to kill off cheap and easy accesibility of film and processing as quickly as it looks now.

[albert knapp md]

I agree with Jay's first paragraph but disagree with the second.

The M7 will cost you but in the end run you are ending up with

superior technology. If cost is the issue, buy the M7 second

-hand. As to film, it will be around for quite awhile. I do however

concede that the pace of technologic advancement may slow

down due to digital's allure. Nevertheless, film will always be

available in our lifetimes.

[albert knapp md]

BTW, if you purchase the M7 second-hand, make sure it has the

MP viewfinder. the latter is state of the art. If not, Leica can

upgrade it but, here in the States, this may take quite a while as

the number of "free" MP viewfinders remains limited even though

the factory is producing these around the clock.

[john_collier2]

After long years of using M6s, I can now set my exposures to within a half stop

before lifting the camera to my eye. I do it by NOT thinking about it. My brain has

done it so often that, as long as I do not interfer, it just switches into automatic.

 

My complaint against the M7 is that the exposure lock in AE is only good for one

shot. This would seem to me to negate the advantages of AE if I have to meter and

then recompose for every shot. On the other hand, an M7 functions just like a TTL in

manual mode. You can use it like a TTL but have an AE setting for when you are

walking into an unknown situation.

[peter_n1664876959]

Thomas I went through the same decision process about 5 months ago also coming from Nikon and experiencing the Leica/Nikkor difference too (although I'm keeping my F3 and lenses). I ended up with an M6TTL because although I do like aperture priority, my personal style includes using the "sunny 16 rule" and using chromogenic film that has wide exposure latitude.

 

I would have been just as happy with an M6 "classic" but figured that I might add another body in the future, either another M6TTL or an M7 and I wanted cameras with the same shutter speed dial direction. Having used the M6 for a few months I would now lean toward another M6TTL - that's how happy I am with the camera.

[ralph_barker]

I think it's really a matter of how the differing features match with your needs and/or shooting style, Thomas. To me, however, auto-exposure without a matrix type of sensor driven by sophisticated algorhythms in firmware doesn't make a lot of sense. But some people find the M7's AE feature to be convenient. And, while the electronically-controlled shutter appears to have some advantages, accuracy-wise, long-term reliability may be an open question.

 

I have two M6TTL bodies, one black and the other chrome, for quick recognition of the different film types loaded (B&W in the black body, color in the chrome). Both have 0.72 viewfinders for maximum flexibility and consistent lens interchange. I shoot without glasses, so the 0.72 works OK for me, and retains the framelines for the 135mm lens.

[george_shihanian]

Thomas,

 

It seems you are an intelligent photographer who understands metering, exposure, etc. You also seem to understand any benefits and negatives involved, so I think, only you can make the final decision. What works for all of us may not be the #1 choice for you. What you can take solace in, is the fact that there is no wrong choice here.

 

I would agree with John's posting above, especially how AE is a nice added peace of mind for the unknown situation, or, when you just don't feel like thinking that much on a certain afternoon and you can let the camera take over. I'd advise you to get the M7 (get it used, there isn't really 900 Euros difference, is there?)and later on, for a more "traditional Leica-feel", get a good, solid M3 or M4-P for a second body for the "back-to-basics" days!

[Robin Smith]

Thomas

 

The M7 is attractive as it has all the virtues of an M6/M6TTL, with the advantage of an electronic shutter and AE when you want it. My only negative thought about the M7 is that historically one of the main things about a Leica was that it was a manual camera. This was its eccentricity, but also its source of longevity. The M7 is electronic - while one might argue this makes it more reliable it does make it less long-lived. One only needs to look at the Leica R line to see that the manual cameras are the ones that essentially remain in demand. Likewise the Minolta CLE is on its last legs. As to the Konica RF this never really took off. This might be irrelevant as they are not Leicas, but it does perhaps put a question mark over the future long life of M7s. On the other hand life is terribly uncertain and it may be irrelevant to you or indeed at all the way technology is changing.

[jmw__]

The first time you encounter a shooting situation when you wish you had AE, that 900

Euro will seem like nothing to you. It boiled down to this for me: You can always use

M6-style manual metering on the M7. However there's no way to add AE to the M6.

Get the M7.

[al_kaplan1]

I'd suggest an M2 body with a recent CLA, and a Weston Master meter with the Invercone incident light attachment from Quality Lightmetric. There's reliability. You'll have a pile of money to buy lenses and film. You'll also have spot-on exposures!

[thomas_vanhaute1]

Thank you all for these interesting comments. Indeed, as

someone pointed out, one can use an M7 as an M6, but never

the other way round. I also find it interesting that some of you

seem to have very little faith in electronically driven shutters,

regarding their lifespan, while others praise them for their

accuracy. As far as the life-expectancy of electronic shutters is

concerned, it doesn't seem to be an issue with other brands:

somewhere here in my house, there lies a 10 year old Nikon

F-601 (S-601 in the US, I believe) from my college days. And it

has, of course, an electronic leaf-shutter, still in perfect working

condition, even after thousands of releases. But then, might I

argue, the big Japanese brands have a lot more experience with

electronic shutters than Leica ever will....

I know, it IS after all a ridiculous rich-man's problem, this choice

issue of mine...But the 900 Euro's I save by buying an M6 WILL

buy me one of those beautiful Summicrons...

oh boy, Im getting embarassed here; I suppose I should just

thank my lucky stars that I can afford to choose in life...(to end on

a philosophical note...).

[kevin_baker___heidelberg_]

Simple:

 

If you want AE, buy the M7

 

If you don't care about AE, buy the M6.

 

I can't imagine the batteries being an issue. I put an extra set in my pocket before leaving on an important shooting project.

 

Easy stuff here...

[jay_.]

<<One only needs to look at the Leica R line to see that the manual cameras are the ones that essentially remain in demand.>>

 

That's because they're the only ones that aren't junk. And though the SL and SL2 are preferred by people who are in the know (nobody wants the Flex with its non-TTL meter and ridiculous non-focusing screen)they can hardly be said to be "in demand".

 

<<Likewise the Minolta CLE is on its last legs.>>

 

Only because of non-availability of parts, a damn shame.

 

<<As to the Konica RF this never really took off>>

 

Because it was torpedoed by a certain Leica guru's smear campaign which Konica's marketing department thought they could work to their advantage to sell more of their own lenses.

 

 

The real danger of the M7 is that when Leica goes out of business for ignoring its prime market by not offering a digital back or conversion for M cameras, and electronics for the M7 dry up, they will be in the same boat as the CLE.

[al_kaplan1]

True enough as far as electronics goes. A skilled repair person can always machine a new gear or temper a piece of wire into a new spring. Trying to make an electronic microchip? Not so likely. Once they're gone forget it! Anything mechanical that you expect to keep more than 10 years should contain no electronic parts. Eventually your M6TTL will only function as an M4-P, a meterless mechanical camera, while your M7 will adorn your desk as a paperweight.

[Allen Herbert]

while your M7 will adorn your desk as a paperweight.

 

So true. But does it matter? not really, providing you've got plenty of money.

[tom h.]

M6 TTL. It's bitchin'. And BY FAR the best value for money.

 

Tom

[john_collier2]

Thomas,

 

Ten years is not a long time for a Leica M camera. My M2, while it does not see much

use these days, is 43 years old and going strong. A few thousand exposures will not

even break an M camera in let alone start wearing it out. The potential problem with

an M electronic shutter is not reliability but parts availablity thirty years down the

road. Most ten year Nikons and Canons no longer have any new spare parts available.

You can always, albeit at great expense, have mechanical parts made to suit.

 

This is not to dissuade you from the M7 but merely to explain why some Leica owners

seem to have unreasonable expectations. A Leica M is a whole different league from

most other cameras. Sometimes that is good thing, sometimes not...

[Allen Herbert]

What a thought, to use your own brain. Do you really need techy stuff to wipe it for you. Exposure, focus....wow, so difficult Better get a machine to do it all for me. I wonder if you can get automated bogs?

 

Buy a Nikon, get the real thing...forget Leica.

[george_b1]

Jay - But, if Leica goes out of business, where will the parts come from to repair the M2 through M6 line that will be anywhere from five to sixty years old? - - - and beside DAG and a few others scattered throughout the world, who will repair them, especially if the parts supply has dried up?

 

Factoid (someone in Germany correct me, please!!): As I understand it, under German law, if Leica goes out of business, they get a greater tax writeoff by destroying their inventory than by disposing of it via resellers.

[ray .]

M7. Besides everything else that's better about it, it's quieter than the M6. I wouldn't worry about electronics. This is 2003, not 1903.

[robert_vanlane]

I traded my mint M6ttl/Summilux in for a M2 , a BessaT , Summar , 35+50 Summicron , 90 tele elmarit and a 135 elmar and 2 handheld meters.

Although I liked the M6ttl I wanted something that I was not worried about trashing.

[thomas_vanhaute1]

Hi all,

 

I finally made the decision and got out the piggy bank....Bought

an M6 TTL 0,58 with the 28/2 summicron an a 50/2 summicron

last week, and very happy with it. Works like a breeze, and, for the

short period that I've used it in a reportage, never missed AE or

other exposure automations. In fact, I'm sure that, just because

you have to evaluate and meter lightconditions in advance and

manually, you tend to be more carefull about it, which results in

better exposed negatives. And that's a big part of what it's all

about, innit? Thanks all for the opinions.