rolo

"Perhaps, I'm alone on this, but I couldn't give a rat's ass if the

"Leica" script is on the top or not. "

<p>

Rest easy, you have company.

"Really, the only moneymaker for Leica now is the microscope

division: Leica Microsystems."

<p>

Not a division. A completely separate company from Leica

Camera A.G. Check out www.leica.com.

If I just grab a camera, it will be an M6 with a 35 Summilux-ASPH.

If I'm going out for the day looking for pictures, I have a small

Domke bag that I stuff with an M6 or an M6TTL .58, a 28

Summicron, the 35 'lux and a 50 Summilux. I have been using

the 28 a lot in recent months. I seldom use the 50. This shot

was taken with a 28 Elmarit.

<p>

http://www.photo.net/photo/163814&size=lg

Mike, it's only a personal affront if you choose to take it that way.

<p>

I find it tedious to pepper my posts with IMO's. But that's all I

posted: an opinion. The man asked why the M3 was so popular.

I offered my view: Nostalgia. Maybe that's a simplistic answer,

but *I* believe that nostalgia is a BIG FACTOR. Look at all the

posts here and on other lists that talk about elegance,

hiqh-quality engraving, silky smoothness, jewel-like quality --

none of this stuff has anything to do with making photographs!

<p>

If you find the M6 viewfinder cluttered, fine. If you don't believe

that anyone purchases old or new Leicas as neck jewelry, fine. If

you or anyone else believes that Leica should have closed its

R&D department in 1966, fine. I believe otherwise, but of course

everyone is entitled to their opinion, aren't they? I am not trying to

convince you or anyone else to abandon their M3. The M3 was

the most popular Leica M model produced before the era of the

M6. It was and is a well-loved camera. But in 2002, *I* believe

that MOST of the enthusiasm for cameras like the M2/M3 and the

screwmount Leicas is nostalgia. Practical nostalgia in that these

machines still work well, but nostalgia just the same, as

designs, materials and convenience features have advanced.

<p>

I have had my share of annoying problems with the M6 and, as I

said in another thread, I believe that the M6/M6TTL is the worst

camera Leica has ever built. But as I said in the same sentence,

I also believe that the M6TTL is the BEST camera Leica has ever

made. Kind of the culmination of design advances in mechanical

rangefinder cameras.

<p>

Do I have to say FOR ME, IMO, YMMV for you to not take it

personally?

<p>

Snipe at me off this list. Save your etiquette lectures for private

e-mail. Let's leave these nice people alone.

Mike Dixon wrote: "Robert, if an M6 suits your needs better than

an M3, you're quite welcome to use one. But please spare me

the snide attitude because an M3 suits my needs better . . . "

<p>

Don't bust a gut. I was expressing an opinion, not intentionally

issuing a personal affront. If you choose to be insulted, so be it.

But you could spare me the condescension .

<p>

Let's try it this way: "Mike, if an M3 suits your needs better than an

M6, you're quite welcome to use one. But please spare me the

snide attitude because an M6 suits my needs better . . ."

<p>

Still smells bad, doesn't it?

<p>

Anyway, I'm sorry if you think I insulted your favorite camera. I

didn't say that 40-year-old (or older) M3's don't work, can't work,

or won't work for many applications. At root all of these

machines are just light-tight boxes that hold film and mount

Leica M lenses. But in my view, the increased "precision" of the

M3 rangefinder is academic as the focusing accuracy of the .72

rangefinder of all subsequent Leica M's is overkill for the vast

majority of lenses. (And for those who want to nitpick, both the

Noctilux and the 75 Summilux were introduced during a time

when .72 rangefinders were current, not the .91 of the M3.)

Viewfinder "clutter" exists only for the easily confused or those

who don't use their cameras very often (ditto the "distraction"

caused by metering LED's). I simply don't see the framelines I'm

not using and I don't see the LED's unless I'm looking for them.

<p>

I think the M4-era film loading and rewind mechanisms are

vastly superior to the those of the M2/M3. I don't have misloads.

And I don't believe that anyone who uses an M4, etc., regularly

has misloads, either.

I ruefully concede the point about rangefinder flare. But the lack

thereof is not unique to the M3. Rangefinder flare was offered as

standard equipment beginning with the M4-P and if anything it

was enhanced on the M6. It is disgraceful, particularly since

Leica cannot/will not correct it. I use 3M Durapore adhesive tape

to decrease the flare on my cameras; a pathetic(though effective)

way to fix a problem on a $2000 camera.

<p>

I think the M3 is a perfectly lovely camera. But it is an old

camera. With old cameras parts wear out and are sometimes

hard to replace; viewfinders and rangefinders yellow and

separate (and cost anywhere from $150 to $600 to fix/replace);

vulcanite dries out, cracks and peels off. All that said, I would be

happy to own an M3, just as I would love to own a nice M4 (my

favorite M). But that's largely because I think they're cool tools. I

suspect that I would still reach for and use an M6 more often

than anything else.

<p>

Ultimately I don't need brass, engraved script, big red dots,

self-timers or any of the other cosmetics that appeal so much to

the connoisseurs. And I absolutely stand by my original

statement that dollar-for-dollar the best USER Leica available is

clean, used M6 or M6TTL.

<p>

I presume that you (and a number of others, I'm sure) will

disagree. That's fine. I'm not going to get all huffy and take it

personally if you do.

Nostalgia. And the mistaken notion that the old ways were the

best ways. The M3 was and is a beautiful camera. But it's an old

camera, with all the performance and maintenance problems

that entails(e.g., when the viewfinder/rangefinder goes, it's gone;

the only replacement is the mechanism from the M6J -- not

cheap by a long shot). I think that if you've got $1000 or more to

throw at a Leica body, the best USER Leica around, for many

reasons, is a used M6/M6TTL. If your budget is tighter than that,

look for an M4-P, M4-2 or well-used (not abused) M2. A really

clean M3 does make splendid photo neck jewelry, no question, f

that's what you're after.

Sounds like this new camera will kill the used market for the

Minolta CLE.

<p>

I have a recommendation for Leica's ad campaign: "The New

Leica M6TTL AE. It's the Least We Could Do."

Because I don't have a lot on my mind at the moment, I was

thinking about the R/EOS setup some more. I agree with Jay. If

the goal is to use R glass on a more "sophisticated" camera

body, I think the way to go is with an R8. I'm not much of an R8

enthusiast, but with the prices plummeting it seems a more

logical and practical "modern" mate for R lenses than an EOS.

You get full-aperture metering in evaluative, center-weight and

pseudo-spot modes, TTL flash with rear-curtain sync switchable

on the body, etc., etc. No you don't get E-TTL, but that seems

pretty minor, and you don't get a built-in motor, which isn't a huge

deal except that you need the R8 motor drive ($500-$700) (not

the winder) to get a vertical release. :-( Nice bright finder on the

R8, too.

As noted, it's all manual, which means that you can only meter in

stop-down mode. The camera will work in Aperture Priority, but

again, only in stop-down mode. It's all a bit slow in use, but it

works.

"Incidentally, all my lenses (as well as my R8 bodies) have a

FIVE YEAR passport guarrantee. The additional $75 for the extra

TWO years is well worth it and I heartily recommend it! "

<p>

Unless you've got something different, the Leica extended

warranty is NOT a Passport Warranty. The no-fault Passport

runs for three years from purchase, then the extended warranty

kicks in for the remaining two. Back your car over your lens at

Year 3 + 1 Day and you're out of luck. . . .

35 Summilux-ASPH. Before that, 35 Summicron-M. I'm starting

a serious drift to the 28 Summicron, however. It tends to live on

my .58 body and I love the .58 body. . . .

Jay wrote: "I agree with Rob (Appleby), unless the new body has

an autoexposure "lock" function, it will be a problem."

<p>

The M6TTL already has AE lock, it just doesn't have AE. Take a

meter reading with an M6TTL, press the shutter release down

partially and point the camera at a different brightness area. The

exposure remains locked. This feature obviously is useless on

the M6TTL, but certainly showed was coming. Apparently the

exposure mechanism in the M6TTL is basically the same circuit

as in the R8, which, of course, has AE lock. An evaluative meter

in the new rangefinder might be a nice touch, but I wonder if we'll

even see a flash sync higher than 1/125.

"Can't you see, what many of us want is for them to rebuild the

M2/M4, how much R&D does that take for goodness sake - just

dust off the old plans and start filing that brass!!! "

<p>

I see clean, used M2's and M4's for sale all the time, and for far

less than a new one would cost. Add $200 for a CLA and the

camera (particularly the M4) would be as good or better than

new.

<p>

As far as the M2/M3 advance lever, buy one from Leica service.

Someone in this group has put one of these things on an M6.

Check the archive. Though I think the M4-style swivel advance

lever is the best manual advance lever ever put on a camera. A

great design. Horses for courses. . . .

<p>

I fail to see how engraving would make any camera a better

picture-taking tool.

<p>

"Sorry but self timers (built in, not those sticky out top retro

accessory things) are incredibly useful. "

<p>

OK, I'll bite: How?

"Is it not time to expand the M range a la the Nikon F series or

EOS range to cover all tastes from basic light tight box to

electronic box of tricks? "

<p>

If Leica had the financial resources, R&D staff, etc., that

Nikon/Canon have, then this might make sense. But they don't.

<p>

I want a digital body that will mount M (preferably) or R lenses.

Lose the Rotpunkt, put a switch on the battery, beyond that they

should leave the camera alone; they've done enough damage

already.

<p>

As far as I'm concerned, the M6TTL is the best Leica M camera

I've ever used (and I think I've used 'em all on one occasion or

another). Also, IMO, the M6TTL may be the worst M camera

Leica has ever made. I suppose they could figure out a way to

cheapen it further, so I don't want to encourage them.

<p>

What's this recurring obsession with self-timers? Buy a Hama

screw-in thingie for $20 and through it in your bag. Are there

really people out there who use a self-timer regularly? Why?

A small point about the USA Passport Warranty: it does cover the

camera if you drop it in a lake or off a building or something like

that, IF you can recover the serial number. In other words, the

Passport is not insurance. Is it worth $300 to $400? Depends. I

purchased a new, USA Passport warrantied R6.2 early last year.

It's been repaired twice by Leica USA so far (defective TTL flash

circuitry, jammed advance mechanism) and will be going back

sometime this year (intermittent self timer circuit). If my camera

hadn't been covered by a Leica USA warranty, I'd be out of pocket

a fair chunk of change, I suspect. Also, Leica fixed my camera

FAST. Many, many people have never had a single problem with

the R6.2 so my experience should not be viewed as typical.

"For those not familiar with Parkfield, it sits atop the San Andreas

fault, and boasts the title of "Earthquake Capitol of the World"

with magnitude 6 or higher quakes about every 22 years. The

USGS actively monitors the area with some 200 seismic

instruments. "

<p>

All well and good, but not in any way indicated by the photograph

itself. Without the background info, it's just a shaky photo of a

street sign. Does the picture work without the caption? IMO, no.

The Metz 32MZ3, 40MZ3i and 54MZ3 will all work fine in TTL mode on an

M6TTL. You need the SCA 3502 module, which will work on all three

flashes (the 3501 will work on the 32MZ3 and the 40MZ3i; it WILL NOT

work on the 54MZ3). All offer bounce and swivel heads. The 32MZ3 is

the smallest and lightest of the trio, but the 40MZ3i and the 54MZ3i

are a bit more versatile and MUCH more powerful. It's also much easier

to put light modification goodies (Lumiquest or Omnibounce) on the 40

or 54. I know from experience that the 54MZ3 can put enough strain on

the top plate of an M6TTL to knock the rangefinder vertical alignment

out of whack. The 40MZ3i weighs about the same, so it might be a

problem, too. I use mine mostly on my R6.2 or as a TTL slave, so I

haven't torqued an M6 with it yet.

Alfie wrote: "You may perceive my comment as being sexist but it is

not." Obviously I disagree. Manual 35mm cameras are basically simple

tools but they all work essentially the same way. There is nothing

unique or special about the basic functions of a "modern" (M3 or later)

M camera and nothing unique at all about the basic functions of SL or R

cameras including the R8. What of focusing, aperture, shutter speed,

metering, or shutter button pressing must be more painstakingly taught

to women than to men? Leicas work the same way, with the controls in

basically the same positions, as Pentax K1000's, Nikon FM-10's and

Nikon FM2's. High school girls (and boys) in photo classes use manual

35mm cameras such as these every day. Do you honestly believe that

their teachers had to use undo patience to teach the girls the basics

while all the guys picked it up in a heartbeat? If someone wrote, "I

think that Alfie Wang will enjoy Leica if you take the time patiently

to teach him the basics," wouldn't you find that patronizing? It's a

fact, Alfie. Even a girl can learn how to take a picture with a manual

35mm camera by reading the instructions.

Maybe women USE Leicas while men sit around on Web lists obsessing over

them. Just off the top of my head I can think of the following Leica-

using women: Helen Levitt, Sylvia Plachy, Maggie Steber, Mary Ellen

Mark, Abigail Heyman. I suspect that none of them would be terribly

interested in entering a long discussion of the merits of black paint

over black chrome or zinc rather than brass. They make pictures.

<p>

Alfie Wang wrote: "I think that females enjoy Leica if you take the

time patiently to teach them the basics."

<p>

I think that this is an ugly, condescending, sexist remark.

Maybe I'm missing something, but are you (PD) looking to "exhaustively

test" every function on a brand new camera you just took out of the

box? Do you doubt Leica's quality control to THAT extent? Put a

battery in it (the one Leica provides is usually OK), dry fire it at

each shutter speed, swing a lens from near focus to infinity, flick the

frameline selector, then put some film in it and go take pictures.

When you finish that roll, put another one in and take some more

pictures. Keep doing the film in/film out routine as often possible

until something actually goes wrong with the camera (usually a minimum

of five years, often much, much longer). This is just a Leica thing,

right? People who buy Nikon F5's, Canon EOS-1V's and the like don't

"exhaustively test" their brand new cameras, do they? They load 'em up

and use 'em. That's what I do, but as I say, maybe I'm missing

something.

Any Metz flash fitted with the SCA 351 adapter will work fine with an

R7. I have both a 40-MZ3i and a 54-MZ3 and they work great with my

R6.2 (same basic flash circuit as the R7). I prefer the newer 54-MZ3

because of its "cobra" styling, but the 40-MZ3i is just as powerful and

just as versatile on the camera. I now often use mine as a TTL slave.

Works great.

<p>

Rob Schneider

Having run the experiment at a number of weddings, I can confirm that

the 54MZ-3 mounted on camera will have an adverse effect on your

rangefinder vertical alignment. The vertical on my M6.85 is out and it

gets farther out with the addition of the flash. :-( Use a bracket or

use a smaller flash. Too bad, as the 54MZ-3 is GREAT.

To somewhat echo Douglas Kinnear's post, I'm honestly puzzled: Why is

this a problem? If you use your camera almost daily, it becomes second

nature to visualize a corner, if you REALLY need to know where the

corner is (what crucial compositional element is getting tucked into

your corners?). And I don't understand the "clutter" beef, either. I

never see the frames I'm not using unless I WANT to -- the 135 in the

35 for a rough guess of metering angle, e.g., or any inside framelines

to help true up a horizontal or vertical line. Those pesky additional

lines are downright handy sometimes.

<p>

I'd be the last photographer you'd ever meet to sing the praises of the

M6 in an unqualified manner (I've got one going back for service for

the second time this year, third time in the last two years), but I am

consistently bemused by the persistent fetishism for a 40-year-old

camera. And yes, I have used M2's and M3's. Worship is unwarranted,

IMO.

Mani Sitaraman wrote:

<p>

". . .But AE spot, without a lock is useless. The point of Leica Ms is

ergonomics and simplicity of function. Any AE-M would have to take this

into account carefully to preserve the 'philosophy' of Leica."

<p>

The Leica M6TTL (as opposed to the "Classic") already has AE lock, it

just doesn't have AE! Take a meter reading, press the shutter release

about halfway down, then point the camera into different light. The

meter reading is locked and does not change. An accident or a

foreshadowing of features to come?