J J Kapsberger
Well-known
Insanity rules on this forum. Witness the fact that the MP leads the M7--the greatest M camera ever in terms of speed and ergonomics, which is what for so many years set the M cameras apart from the competition--in voting.
The MP is a nice little toy in terms of fit and finish, but in terms of practical use, it's not in the same league as the M7.
I have spoken.
The MP is a nice little toy in terms of fit and finish, but in terms of practical use, it's not in the same league as the M7.
I have spoken.
dof
Fiat Lux
M6TTL! The hybrid that contains the best of both. (except for the build quality that is...)
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
I have owned in the past in order: M6, M6TTL, MP and now an M4. The one I miss most is the TTL. The reasonably sized and right way turning shutter speed dial is the deal maker. The M7s AE and the peace of mind that the mechanical 1/60 and 1/125 speeds are icing on the cake. Make it an M7 for this hombre.
Stoneaxe
Member
"Yes, I like the AE, and I use it often; however, there is one feature of the M7 that the MP lacks, viz., very precise shutter speeds. Since I shoot 'chromes 95% of the time, decent exposures are appreciated.
I can set the M7 on 1/250 and know it's on 1/125."
I thought the M7 was supposed to be a little better than that. My MP shutter speeds are a lot more accurate!
I can set the M7 on 1/250 and know it's on 1/125."
I thought the M7 was supposed to be a little better than that. My MP shutter speeds are a lot more accurate!
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Has ANYONE had their mind changed by anything in this poll?
The arguments for and against each camera come down to four groups:
1 The actual major differences: AE + battery dependency
2 Personal preference, often based on the above
3 Other, minor, historical differences, mostly or all inapplicable to current cameras (e.g. flare, eyepiece sealing)
4 Hysteria, hearsay and sheer nonsense
A few further thoughts:
I've been shooting transparencies in Leicas for well over 30 years and have yet to have shutters that are hopelessly inaccurate.
It's dead easy to compensate for a consistently slow shutter, regardless of which film you use. I know: on my old Pentax SV, the shutter is up to a stop out on some speeds. If the shutter is inconsistent, there's something badly wrong with it.
Does anyone seriously believe that Leica maintains (for example) two separate sets of wind-on mechanisms, 'cheap'n'nasty' for M7 and 'the best' for MP? Components are continuously upgraded or (sometimes) downgraded and wherever there is a possibility of using the same components, it makes sense to do so.
I've lost track of how many thousand pictures I've had published over the last 30 years or so, and the majority have been taken with Leicas: M2, M3, M4-P, MP, plus a few with M6ttl and even my old IIIa. The IIIa ceased to be reliable some time around its 60th birthday, and one of the M2s jammed once when it was in its 30s but was soon fixed. I'd rather have an M7 than none of the above, but I'd rather have an MP than an M7: personal preference. To call an MP a 'toy' next to the more 'practical' M7 is... well... odd, and personally biased, to say the least.
Cheers,
Roger
The arguments for and against each camera come down to four groups:
1 The actual major differences: AE + battery dependency
2 Personal preference, often based on the above
3 Other, minor, historical differences, mostly or all inapplicable to current cameras (e.g. flare, eyepiece sealing)
4 Hysteria, hearsay and sheer nonsense
A few further thoughts:
I've been shooting transparencies in Leicas for well over 30 years and have yet to have shutters that are hopelessly inaccurate.
It's dead easy to compensate for a consistently slow shutter, regardless of which film you use. I know: on my old Pentax SV, the shutter is up to a stop out on some speeds. If the shutter is inconsistent, there's something badly wrong with it.
Does anyone seriously believe that Leica maintains (for example) two separate sets of wind-on mechanisms, 'cheap'n'nasty' for M7 and 'the best' for MP? Components are continuously upgraded or (sometimes) downgraded and wherever there is a possibility of using the same components, it makes sense to do so.
I've lost track of how many thousand pictures I've had published over the last 30 years or so, and the majority have been taken with Leicas: M2, M3, M4-P, MP, plus a few with M6ttl and even my old IIIa. The IIIa ceased to be reliable some time around its 60th birthday, and one of the M2s jammed once when it was in its 30s but was soon fixed. I'd rather have an M7 than none of the above, but I'd rather have an MP than an M7: personal preference. To call an MP a 'toy' next to the more 'practical' M7 is... well... odd, and personally biased, to say the least.
Cheers,
Roger
tomasis
Well-known
WORD roger
I voted on MP and I was happy to see the MP crushing out the M7
seriously speaking, I really don't mind having MP beside M3. It is good to have a black and chrome M3 with Summitar f2.5 and black MP 0,85x with Noctilux, I dream on..
MP3 is much more preferable choice to MP for me due meterless but for the price you can get several m3 instead so hell I go for MP because this costs almost same as blackpainted M3 from Luton UK as used.
I'll see if I can get around with the meter. I could consider M6 0,85x too but the quality of that vf puts me off.
I voted on MP and I was happy to see the MP crushing out the M7
seriously speaking, I really don't mind having MP beside M3. It is good to have a black and chrome
M3 with Summitar f2.5 and black MP 0,85x with Noctilux, I dream on..MP3 is much more preferable choice to MP for me due meterless but for the price you can get several m3 instead so hell I go for MP because this costs almost same as blackpainted M3 from Luton UK as used.
I'll see if I can get around with the meter. I could consider M6 0,85x too but the quality of that vf puts me off.
marke
Well-known
J J Kapsberger said:
The MP follows another direction that set Leica apart from the others: simple, rugged, and keeping the photographer in control.
And if anyone has an extra MP to they have outgrown, I'm still enjoying my childhood so please send them to me.
Call me insane, but I'm happily insane.
pfoto
Well-known
The MP3 has the same meter as the MP.tomasis said:
gberger
Member
Stoneax wrote: I can set the M7 on 1/250 and know it's on 1/125."
I thought the M7 was supposed to be a little better than that. My MP shutter speeds are a lot more accurate!
You might want to research the specs on the M7. The shutter speeds are computer-controlled, with all the speeds from 1/1000 down to Bulb being controlled based on the calibration of the 1/1000 shutter speed. There's no fall-off in the higher speeds nor in the lower ones.
The MP shutter is the same as used on the M6, M4, etc., with the mechanical release of both curtains dependent upon what you have set into the dial, and opon spring tension, rather than a computer-calibrated release for each of the curtains.
The MP has the same variants in shutter speeds as any other mechanical M series.
And - - I still miss my M4!
I thought the M7 was supposed to be a little better than that. My MP shutter speeds are a lot more accurate!
You might want to research the specs on the M7. The shutter speeds are computer-controlled, with all the speeds from 1/1000 down to Bulb being controlled based on the calibration of the 1/1000 shutter speed. There's no fall-off in the higher speeds nor in the lower ones.
The MP shutter is the same as used on the M6, M4, etc., with the mechanical release of both curtains dependent upon what you have set into the dial, and opon spring tension, rather than a computer-calibrated release for each of the curtains.
The MP has the same variants in shutter speeds as any other mechanical M series.
And - - I still miss my M4!
Stoneaxe
Member
Sorry, bgerber, I was just making a cheesy joke about your 1/250 vs. 1/125 typo but you don't seem to have picked it up yet. Yes, as I understand the M7 has a more precise shutter but as my name implies, I am a rough, down and dirty Leica, Tri-X/D76 sort of guy and the MP shutter is at least good enough for my quick and dirty sunny 16 mentality. My little Canonet also does an amazing job with 1.5v battery B/W in the rough/rain etc. It just doesn't fondle as nice as my M3 and BP MP .85! Cheers, my friend.
-kk-
Established
i voted MP because, aside from my lust for this sexy metal lightbox, it gives me a nice escape from 'work', which is done on canon dSLR system. The all manual retro-ness
takes me to a place where photography is just for fun, and i enjoy that 'escape'.
takes me to a place where photography is just for fun, and i enjoy that 'escape'.
Ororaro
Well-known
Come on, now it's become the M7 isn't accurate? Is this some sort of a new Internet Myth in the making?
The M7 is the only M with an electronic shutter, making it the most accurate M.
The M7 is the only M with an electronic shutter, making it the most accurate M.
gberger
Member
Hi, Stoneax -
Yeah! in the very late '39s and '40s, I was using an Argus, with either Panatomic X or Tri-X for film - - and developing and printing the outcomes. It was fun and interesting!
Then, in 1945 in Germany, I bought my IIIc. Didn't have the capability to develop and print - - so I switched to Kodachrome, and I've been a 'chrome addict ever since. Kodachrome, Kodachrome II, Kodachrome 25, Kodachrome 64. The Kodachrome's demanded precise exposure. That's when I switched to a Norwood Director, and since, I've tried almost every incident meter that has been manufactured.
Since I'm a certified Old Fart (85), I take a little time to meter and then to shoot. I have many slides that turned out OK in my earlier years of "grab and shoot" with my M4; however, That's past, and I do like to reflect a little, think about what I want to capture, set my M7, and then shoot. (And, I do need to use the max possible shutter speed).
Yeah! in the very late '39s and '40s, I was using an Argus, with either Panatomic X or Tri-X for film - - and developing and printing the outcomes. It was fun and interesting!
Then, in 1945 in Germany, I bought my IIIc. Didn't have the capability to develop and print - - so I switched to Kodachrome, and I've been a 'chrome addict ever since. Kodachrome, Kodachrome II, Kodachrome 25, Kodachrome 64. The Kodachrome's demanded precise exposure. That's when I switched to a Norwood Director, and since, I've tried almost every incident meter that has been manufactured.
Since I'm a certified Old Fart (85), I take a little time to meter and then to shoot. I have many slides that turned out OK in my earlier years of "grab and shoot" with my M4; however, That's past, and I do like to reflect a little, think about what I want to capture, set my M7, and then shoot. (And, I do need to use the max possible shutter speed).
marke
Well-known
NB23 said:
Ned, Stoneaxe's last post explained his earlier post.
However, that doesn't mean the MP still isn't a better camera.
ERV
Well-known
My vote is for two M6's over either of them.
My two M6's are working mules, I just keep them happy and they plow away.
Now isn't that what a Leica should be?
My two M6's are working mules, I just keep them happy and they plow away.
Now isn't that what a Leica should be?
Stoneaxe
Member
Hi gberger:
God, I'd love to meet you but I'm in the other corner of the continent (Vancouver Is.). I would love to hear more of your stories from back when and see some shots from your past. And I thought mine from the '60's were historic! Can you post any of yours?
I am encouraged that I might have another quarter century playing with these great machines as long as I can find the film. I'll bet I could learn a lot from you.
Cheers
God, I'd love to meet you but I'm in the other corner of the continent (Vancouver Is.). I would love to hear more of your stories from back when and see some shots from your past. And I thought mine from the '60's were historic! Can you post any of yours?
I am encouraged that I might have another quarter century playing with these great machines as long as I can find the film. I'll bet I could learn a lot from you.
Cheers
advance
Newbie
sepiareverb said:
Leica bashing is the new/old fashion. The MP is a super fine light capturing device and to me sums up what the real rangefinder ethic is all about, add too much circuitry and you may as well get an SLR.
Advance
Stoneaxe
Member
Oh yeah, the topic. I have D200 and MP. The D200 will do all the autostuff I could ever want. If you are going Leica M, why not go au naturel? I vote MP.
maddoc
... likes film again.
My vote is for the M7. I don't have one (had and sold an MP) but think that the AE is a feature that increases the amount of "keepers" in critical light conditions or when shooting slide film. Additionally, the electronically controlled shutter is more accurate and reliable compared with the mechanical shutters (All mechanical Leicas - including the MP - develop problems with the shutter sooner or later, especially at speeds 1/500 and 1/1000) and spare batteries are cheaper and more convenient than a CLA...
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Funny, I'd say the exact opposite. AE is fine for average conditions, but when you need to think about departing from the metered reading (e.g. in a whitewashed Greek village, or at an outdoor concert with brightly lit subjects against a dark backdrop) I'd back my judgement every time over blindly following the meter -- which is all AE can do.maddoc said:
As for unreliability, well, I've had one of my M2s cleaned, but it is nearly 50 years old, and what makes anyone think that the M7 shutter will go that long without repair/cleaning?
Also, mechanical failure is often gradual and with warning (roughness, noise, etc,). Electronic failure is sudden and without warning. That's another reason to stick with the MP for me.
Cheers,
Roger
Last edited: