richard_brown1 Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 According to a writer of "Popular Photography", in his opinion the Leica MP is the best Leica RF ever made. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas k. Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Here we go... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_a. Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Maybe the chrome version. I realy don't like the BP smudgy fondler version. Mechanically though I think its great. Rich Pinto told me that none of his were returned to Leica for repair. I know Jay hates it because it is overpriced, but it is a very well built M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_neuthaler Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Richard, You need to stop being silly & go out and take pictures: PHOTOGRAPHY NOT CAMERAS -- remember? Paul Neuthaler, 08/04/03 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_a. Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Hey Guys, There is a bit of gear head in all of us! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bas1 Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 M7 has my vote. MP is looks better though. An MP7??? I'd take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard_brown1 Posted August 4, 2003 Author Share Posted August 4, 2003 I know I'm sorry....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_. Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 <<Rich Pinto told me that none of his were returned to Leica for repair.>> 1)What else would you expect a dealer to say to a customer? 2)Why would they need repair unless the owners left them on the sofa and their dog or grandchild barfed on it? <<I know Jay hates it because it is overpriced, but it is a very well built M.>> 1) I don't hate the MP. I can't hate an inanimate object. 2) It isn't that it's overpriced, it's that it is a self-mocking collage of various M models with the accent on nostalgia. I wouldn't buy one if it cost $500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruno_menilli Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Jay 1) The truth. 2) Because anything made by man can go wrong. Hate: 1) I hate hand guns. 2) All M models are nostalgic, being based on a 50 year old camera, but if they do the job, what's wrong with that? ( Hasselblad 500 ?) Regards Bruno Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_h_osterholm Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 1. I love my hand guns - my CZ85 is the best fondler gun I ever owned - 2. I love my M2 and the M4-2 is Ok, and I wish I had the money to buy the MP, although a nice used M6 would do nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_. Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 You miss the point entirely. A few hours on the pistol range should sharpen you right up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_. Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 My post was for Bruno...John you got caught in the crossfire ;>) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay__3 Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 357 semi-auto Sig. The dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_white2 Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Jay writes: 2) It isn't that it's overpriced, it's that it is a self-mocking collage of various M models with the accent on nostalgia. Let's see, it has a reduced flare viewfinder, like the M4. That's nostalgic? It has a more rugged rewind knob, like the M3 and M2. That's nostalgic? It has no ugly advertising on the front, just like the M3, M2 and M4. That's nostalgic? It has the same shutter dial as the pre-M6TTL cameras, so those of us with older bodies who want to add a body for whatever reason don't have to think about which way to turn the dial while working quickly. More nostalgia I guess? Oh yeah, and it has the old style film advance and preview levers. I guess that's the self-mocking part. What were they thinking of! PJW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lee_shively Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Have we reached the stage in evolution that everything is absolute? The "best" Leica ever made? It's the one you have in your hand when the picture you want to make happens. By the way, next month "Pop Photo" will have another "best" camera to write about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruno_menilli Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Jay Thanks for your suggestion, but no thanks! After having my brother and eldest son murdered by 'sharpened' up scum, I'll repeat my hate of hand guns, to one and all. Regards Bruno Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_b1 Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 No, I didn't run any film through one - - or buy one. But, I had the opportunity at the last LHSA "shoot" to handle the MP for an appreciable length of time. I compared the shutter release (once you got past the initial meter turn-on) with my M4. No contest. I compared the film rewind with my M4. No contest. I compared the covering with my M4. Absolutely no contest. I compared the film advance (although no film was in the camera). Even Steven. I compared the viewfinder brightness. MP by a RCH. I compared viewfinders. No contest, unless you want every lens from 28 through 135 available in a cluttered .78 finder.I compared metering. MP GREAT - - M4 needs an external. Shutter speed accutacy. Well, both use the classic shutter speed timing, rather than the M7s electronic stepless. Shutter noise. Same Result: I'll keep my M4, thank you. Oh, and I wouldn't need to spend additional $$ for that idiotic film rewind thingy. For someone who is young and new to Leicas, I think it's a good camera, as it will last for years and has a superb internal reflective metering system. But, for someone who intends to use the marque for years, I would have to recommend the M7 due to its shutter and an occasionaly-used flash capability Just my very biased and opinionated view - - and I've used Leicas since 1945. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_kaplan1 Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Must be a lot of people rushing out to buy MP's but there're plenty of reasonably priced M2 bodies on eBay. Most have a self timer, and none have a fiddly electrical meter gizmo. It's such a pain to have a camera in the shop for a meter repair when everything else still works great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 It'll be interesting to see what the price of a used MP will be in a year. I'd say $1,500 to $1,800. I'm not about to shell out $2,500 for a new one. Maybe a "pre-owned" one though... Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob F. Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Richard, I don't think the writer would say that if thought the MP to be a dog. But I think that magazines try not to bite the hands that feed them. I bought my M2 around 1960 for $249.00. The cost of living is at least 12 times now what it was then. That makes the MP cheaper than my M2 was, at the time. And you get a meter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Not to make light of the loss Bruno has suffered in his family, but would you hate a camera for being used by tasteless paparazzi to exploit and sensationalize murder and mayhem? These are just objects. Hate the people who misuse them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithdunlop Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Jay, Passport warranty covers dog barf? Good to know. LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard_ilomaki Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 Veering way off topic re: "just objects". The purpose of a camera is to take pictures, where the purpose of a gun is to kill or maim: a very big difference. Many pictures have contributed to to the cessation of wars and hostilities, thus the antithesis of gun usage. Despite what I have just said, the Dark Side of me would gladly fulfill Charlton Heston's wish: "from my cold dead hands". One click of the trigger from John Malkovich's ceramic pistol, and he goes to heaven with cold hands holding his pseudo phallus. Bowling and killing: both great American pastimes. Click those shutters and make beautiful pictures, not triggers to blow teanage faces off. I guess when the NSA monitors this, my name will go on another list. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas k. Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 Yeah, I'm totally opposed to gun control. Let the wanker/fondlers keep their Sig-Sauers (sp?), Smith & Wessons, Colts, etc. That way they can still feel powerful and macho. But if we'd just ban bullets we could save a LOT of lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_.1 Posted August 5, 2003 Share Posted August 5, 2003 the purpose of alcohol is to intoxicate drivers so they can turn their vehicles into 3500 lb. torpedos to impale innocent drivers with. this makes sense, no? then if not applying the same logic you'll agree that firearms are made to hunt with to provide sustenance, target practice recreationally, and to safeguard one's life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now