Bill Blackwell Images

<p>Jeff: The Zeiss appears to have more contrast in this example, which might appear on your screen as a slight variation in exposure. But when you look at the raw files what you clearly see is the color variation between them.</p> <p>I'll post another example momentarily. ...</p>

<p>The Zeiss. ...</p><div></div>

<p>I'm fanatical about Leica lenses, but IMHO the 50mm Planar ZM comes so close to the Summicron IV in its performance it's scary. Another close comparison is the 18mm Biogon and the Leica Super-Elmar. I would challenge anyone who's A/B'd those two lenses to independently tell them apart. I have tested other ZM lenses against Leica and they all perform very well with only color variations between them. </p><div></div>

<p>Just messing around with the Monochrom on a rainy afternoon. ...</p><div></div>

<p>First test shot out of the camera for detail. ...</p><div></div>

<p>I recently purchased a new Monochrom due to the falling prices as a result of the 246 version being released. I'm finding the B&W medium refreshing. The shot below was a test shot to see how the camera processes clouds (no processing). Not bad, but this shot did prompt me to purchase yellow 16 and red 25 filters for all of my lenses.</p><div></div>

<p>Don't want a meter? </p> <p>Buy a clean freshly CLA'd M4 for about a third the price of an M-A! ... or an M6 and take the battery out. </p><div></div>

<p>The M5 has no 28mm framelines (that's what the 25mm Biogon brings up on an M6/7/P). The 28mm framelines are paired with the 90mm framelines on those cameras, so your M5 thinks it's looking into a 90mm lens. </p> <p>The M5 meter is a spot meter, so the meter reading will be coming from what would approximate your M5's RF patch.</p> <p>Hope this helps.</p>

<p>I pretty much always focus horizontally then frame the vertical shot. </p> <p>Hold the camera with your right hand on the shutter and your left hand palm-up under the lens for focusing. When going vertical, rotate the camera to the left so the bottom plate is facing to your right keeping your left-hand stationary (still palm-up). You will never block the RF patch window using this technique - in case you want to focus vertically.</p> <p> </p>

<blockquote> <p>Does anyone know how to fix this? ... I took it to Nikon and they want $150!<br> Any ideas?!</p> </blockquote> <p>If this were me I would consider two options:<br> 1. Pay the $150 and let Nikon fix it; or<br> 2. Buy another body (and likely upgrade to a D5200, a substantially better camera IMHO, in the process).</p> <p> </p>

<blockquote> <p>Did this M2-6 come out of necessity or pleasure?</p> </blockquote> <p>It was just something I did for fun. I simply wanted an M2 with a meter (I've actually done a few of these over the years).</p>

<blockquote> <p>... I was trying to rationalise the thing, only until seeing the double flash ports: which has now left me thinking what is functional and what is just a decoration on this camera. ...</p> </blockquote> <p>The camera is fully functional - only both flash ports work for X flash (no Bulb). </p> <p>The top cover is 100% M2. The chassis/guts and RF are from an M6 manufactured in ~1990.</p>

<p>My point in showing these "out of the box" FrankenLeica examples, is if something's out of place (like a serial number, or lack thereof), it most likely did not originate from Leica (at least not in its current configuration).</p>

<p>Here's another one -</p> <p>AFAIK, Leica NEVER manufactured a black-paint M7 with an M3/2/P Style RW knob.</p><div></div>

<blockquote> <p>An MP, Bill, intended to fox the viewer?</p> </blockquote> <p>Nope. Anyone else?</p> <p>Excepting the vulcanite-like covering and Leicavit, all of it's parts are ca. 1990 or older.</p> <p> </p><div></div>

<blockquote> <p>Looking at the Leica repair stuff on their website it looks like only Germany is repairing the M9. Is this true, or does Leica NJ also offer repair on the digital cameras?</p> </blockquote> <p>Here's a novel idea - Call Leica NJ and ask them.</p>

<p>To prove my point, can anyone tell me the manufacture date of this camera?</p><div></div>

<p>There were some M6 (hot shoe) spare parts made without serial numbers for replacement - on the M6J, for example. Leica also made spare top covers. Therefore, based on the OP's description this could be a parts camera; there are no assurances whatsoever of when the camera was made. There isn't even a seal on the lens mount on these cameras.</p> <p>Because of these factors, there is really no assurance of the age of a camera based solely on the serial number or generation of the top plate unless you have the original box with matching serial number.</p> <p>However, there is one sign that could indicate an older generation M6 chassis - if there is hard 'crinkling' paint around the back plate, then it's likely an early chassis (all others had smooth relatively soft semi-gloss black paint).</p>