Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
I met up with Francisco after work last night. Whenever I do this it usually ends up costing me money. 
I'm not in financial condition to do it right now, but I'm thinking about overhauling my RF kit. I traditionally shot SLR with a pair of near identical bodies, and I think I'd like to pick up a second M6. I'd also like to work toward replacing my CV glass in kind with Leica (which was a long-term goal already).
I really like my M3 but I'm not completely comfortable shooting with a meterless body any more. I did sunny 16 for years with my Nikons, but I was also shooting 16 hours a day back then and I was *much* younger and on top of my game. I'm just an old duffer now. However, I think I'll give myself more time with the M3 before making a decision about spinning it off. It works well with my 40 Cron and 90 Elmar-C, and would be great with a Canon 50 f/1.2. I have come to the conclusion that shooting with an M6 and an M3 at the same time doesn't work for me.
Most everything else could go away. The If hasn't moved me like I thought it would (after years of lusting for one, no less) and I no longer have any form of Barnack fever. If I sold the If and 35 Summaron plus my 135 Elmarit I could probably pick up a second M6 body. Then I could wait out the current weak dollar and pick up a 28 Cron and a 75 Cron as they drop in price.
What to do, what to do... Bother.
I'm not in financial condition to do it right now, but I'm thinking about overhauling my RF kit. I traditionally shot SLR with a pair of near identical bodies, and I think I'd like to pick up a second M6. I'd also like to work toward replacing my CV glass in kind with Leica (which was a long-term goal already).
I really like my M3 but I'm not completely comfortable shooting with a meterless body any more. I did sunny 16 for years with my Nikons, but I was also shooting 16 hours a day back then and I was *much* younger and on top of my game. I'm just an old duffer now. However, I think I'll give myself more time with the M3 before making a decision about spinning it off. It works well with my 40 Cron and 90 Elmar-C, and would be great with a Canon 50 f/1.2. I have come to the conclusion that shooting with an M6 and an M3 at the same time doesn't work for me.
Most everything else could go away. The If hasn't moved me like I thought it would (after years of lusting for one, no less) and I no longer have any form of Barnack fever. If I sold the If and 35 Summaron plus my 135 Elmarit I could probably pick up a second M6 body. Then I could wait out the current weak dollar and pick up a 28 Cron and a 75 Cron as they drop in price.
What to do, what to do... Bother.
Avotius
Some guy
In my opinion, just do it. Why not? If you think you can spare some of the gear that you dont use much or wouldn't mind getting rid of I cant see a downside to getting another m6 body if you think you really want it more then whatever you want to get rid of. Having a meter in body really is a great thing after all and by selling a few things you should have more then enough to pay for a nice shiny M6 to use!
BillBingham2
Registered User
Ken,
Silly question, do you need two bodies? With an M6 a 28 'Cron and a 75 'Cron what else would you need? Perhaps the answer is an SL2 180/2.8 in the bag. As backup stick a 35 for the SL2 in the bottom and you're done.
Going for the best glass is a great target. The M6 has framelines for the 28 so you do not need to mess with any accessory finders. You might see if DAG can do a custom job on your 50/75 frame line to beef up the 75 and remove the 50 (Keep the parts).
I think you would be better served carrying less, higher quality and shot more. You want a second camera as a backup, the SL2 would do that. Great alternatives would be a Nikon F2A with the new ED/AF 180/2.8 (swap out the 35 for a 28/2.8 AIs) or an OM-3 with a 180/2.8. You might add a 2X teleconverter also. The advantage of the SL2 is that the focus and f-Stops all go the same direction. Some times a real pain when you do not want to think. One of the reasons I've moved over to an S3-2000.
As always, your mileage may vary.
Hope all is well my friend.
B2 (;->
Silly question, do you need two bodies? With an M6 a 28 'Cron and a 75 'Cron what else would you need? Perhaps the answer is an SL2 180/2.8 in the bag. As backup stick a 35 for the SL2 in the bottom and you're done.
Going for the best glass is a great target. The M6 has framelines for the 28 so you do not need to mess with any accessory finders. You might see if DAG can do a custom job on your 50/75 frame line to beef up the 75 and remove the 50 (Keep the parts).
I think you would be better served carrying less, higher quality and shot more. You want a second camera as a backup, the SL2 would do that. Great alternatives would be a Nikon F2A with the new ED/AF 180/2.8 (swap out the 35 for a 28/2.8 AIs) or an OM-3 with a 180/2.8. You might add a 2X teleconverter also. The advantage of the SL2 is that the focus and f-Stops all go the same direction. Some times a real pain when you do not want to think. One of the reasons I've moved over to an S3-2000.
As always, your mileage may vary.
Hope all is well my friend.
B2 (;->
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I like working with two Leicas. I will use either two M6 or one M6 and another M. One camera around my neck, and one in the Domke bag. It cuts down on lens changing--fewer missed shots.
It's a good idea, Ken. I think you are on the right track.
It's a good idea, Ken. I think you are on the right track.
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
OK, by the numbers:
Colin - my thinking exactly!
Bill - need, no; prefer, yes! I spent most of my short career shooting a pair of F2s and really like having two identical bodies with the same emulsion but different lenses at hand. I was using the OM-1n or (more often) the OM-2n as a body with a 24 and 135 supplementing the M6; yes, it works and I'll probably keep them available for just that purpose. (Lunch some day?)
Erik - why would I want *that* boat anchor?
Rob - agreed, that's why I'm considering the change. I personally find a M6 / M3 combination somewhat jarring.
Colin - my thinking exactly!
Bill - need, no; prefer, yes! I spent most of my short career shooting a pair of F2s and really like having two identical bodies with the same emulsion but different lenses at hand. I was using the OM-1n or (more often) the OM-2n as a body with a 24 and 135 supplementing the M6; yes, it works and I'll probably keep them available for just that purpose. (Lunch some day?)
Erik - why would I want *that* boat anchor?
Rob - agreed, that's why I'm considering the change. I personally find a M6 / M3 combination somewhat jarring.
Last edited:
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
This issue is raising its ugly head again - I never did anything about it.
I'm actually thinking about reducing the load even further to two different two lens kits:
1) M6 + 35 Cron + 75 Cron and add a second M6 body later; and
2) M3 + 40 Cron + 90 Elmar-C (assuming I keep the M3, which is likely).
I'm starting to realize 28mm just doesn't work for me on a .72 M6 - too much eyeball wagging.
As I mentioned earlier, I'll just carry either my OM-1n or OM-2n with my Oly 24 and 135 on those rare occasions that I need additional range. For some odd reason I find OMs work really well as second bodies with Ms, and SLRs are easier for me to use with wide and long glass.
If I could only sell my If, I'd be on my way!
I'm actually thinking about reducing the load even further to two different two lens kits:
1) M6 + 35 Cron + 75 Cron and add a second M6 body later; and
2) M3 + 40 Cron + 90 Elmar-C (assuming I keep the M3, which is likely).
I'm starting to realize 28mm just doesn't work for me on a .72 M6 - too much eyeball wagging.
As I mentioned earlier, I'll just carry either my OM-1n or OM-2n with my Oly 24 and 135 on those rare occasions that I need additional range. For some odd reason I find OMs work really well as second bodies with Ms, and SLRs are easier for me to use with wide and long glass.
If I could only sell my If, I'd be on my way!
maddoc
... likes film again.
I am settled to my 21-35-50 (2x)-90 kit (got an additional 50, a DR Summicron, with my M2) since some time but more often have tried and changed the M bodies ....
Right now the M4-P is my all-can-do workhorse (as universal as an M6 but no meter), the M2 is as good (21 needs an external VF anyhow and the 35-50-90 frame lines are present) and my M5 has the advantage of having a meter (but can't be used with the 21). Except the M5/21mm combination, I can use all my lenses with all my cameras and have identical VF magnification.
So finally I have a 3 bodies / 5 lenses M-setup, which is more than I need but good to have in case something breaks or gets lost.
I should go out and shoot more ...
Cheers,
Gabor
Right now the M4-P is my all-can-do workhorse (as universal as an M6 but no meter), the M2 is as good (21 needs an external VF anyhow and the 35-50-90 frame lines are present) and my M5 has the advantage of having a meter (but can't be used with the 21). Except the M5/21mm combination, I can use all my lenses with all my cameras and have identical VF magnification.
So finally I have a 3 bodies / 5 lenses M-setup, which is more than I need but good to have in case something breaks or gets lost.
I should go out and shoot more ...
Cheers,
Gabor
back alley
IMAGES
i say play with it till you get something that feels right for you.
my current kit is as close to perfect as i have ever had it.
it would be nice if it stayed that way
joe
my current kit is as close to perfect as i have ever had it.
it would be nice if it stayed that way
joe
payasam
a.k.a. Mukul Dube
"I'm just an old duffer now." Ken, you've a long way to go. I must say, though, that considerable use of a digital SLR has made me somewhat shaky with my M2. I find myself taking far more meter readings than I needed with my M3 twenty years ago. When I used a Rolleicord forty years ago I had no meter; but few negatives were wildly off. Automation -- of any kind -- spoils us.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
I agree with Mukul about automation. I prefer incident metering, and I mostly use a Weston Master V. A long time ago I got in the habit of setting the camera first, then seeing if the meter agreed with my estimation of the light. With practice you get very good at it, just like you can learn to know exactly where to stand to frame your picture with a particular focal length before you look through the finder. Automation probably destroys brain cells...LOL
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
I started off with meterless bodies and mostly guesstimated exposure. I like automation but understand enough about exposure to know when to override the automation. Do I want to go back to meterless bodies? The thought of going back to an M2 from the MP sounds like fun but it would be pretty awkward at least for the first 50 rolls
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
I'm historically an incident meter user, too - but it's very nice not having to worry about carrying one more piece of gear around my neck! I do quite well using the TTL meter and averaging the scene in my head - I don't chase the meter in any case.
Tim Gray
Well-known
The 28 cron rocks. You can probably get a good deal on it too, now, new. Buy from the UK and take advantage of the weak pound. I bet you could get one at Robert White's for less then $3k...
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Hey, when I met with Ken before last time it also costed me money: his work with trains brainwashed me enough to go for a dSLR (horror of horrors!!! ).
). 
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
The "two bodies - 3 lens set up" is practical and not to cumbersome. A basic M6 (either a 0.72 or a 0.85). Dedicate this body to 50/75 lenses and a second body for the wide stuff. BUT which body!
You already have a metered body with the M6 so anything that will give you good view with a 28 would do. M4P is a possibility - though there still is some "eye ball wagging" going on with the 0.72 finder of that camera.
The 0.58 finder in the MP is good and you can occasionally find decent priced M6TTL's with the 0,58 finder. Works very well with the 28 and 35 focal length. Even with glasses you can see the 28 frames and the 35 is nice as there are no other frames interfering.
If you are set on a 35/75 set up - get the 0.85 M6 and have the 50 frame blanked out and then get a M6TTL 0.58 for the 35 and wider. I have been using my Millenium M6TTL (which I had converted to 0.58 by DAG when I got it) with the 25f2.8 ZM Biogon too - just add a bit or shoot "outside" of the 28 frame. It is unfortunate that the MP's are so damned expensive as those can be had with 0.58 finder "of the shelf" and the shutter speed dial rotates the same way as the M6 "classic".
I tend to use the Bessa R4M for 28 and wider as it has the best finder for those FL's. For the 75f2 I use the R3M/R3A as it has a 75 frame unencumbered by other frame lines.
As for 28's - I had the Summicron 28 and got rid of it, borrowed one earlier this year to shoot a comparison between the Ultron 28f2 and it - not enough difference (on film at least) to warrant the $2500 difference!
My current "lusting for lens" is the 24mm f3.8 Elmar Asph that Leica showed at Photokina and that I had a chance to shoot with in Louisville. KY during the LHSA meet. Is that ever a good piece of glass! Worked fine on my 0,58 MP too - even without a finder. A 24/35/75 kit with two bodies would work fine for me.
You already have a metered body with the M6 so anything that will give you good view with a 28 would do. M4P is a possibility - though there still is some "eye ball wagging" going on with the 0.72 finder of that camera.
The 0.58 finder in the MP is good and you can occasionally find decent priced M6TTL's with the 0,58 finder. Works very well with the 28 and 35 focal length. Even with glasses you can see the 28 frames and the 35 is nice as there are no other frames interfering.
If you are set on a 35/75 set up - get the 0.85 M6 and have the 50 frame blanked out and then get a M6TTL 0.58 for the 35 and wider. I have been using my Millenium M6TTL (which I had converted to 0.58 by DAG when I got it) with the 25f2.8 ZM Biogon too - just add a bit or shoot "outside" of the 28 frame. It is unfortunate that the MP's are so damned expensive as those can be had with 0.58 finder "of the shelf" and the shutter speed dial rotates the same way as the M6 "classic".
I tend to use the Bessa R4M for 28 and wider as it has the best finder for those FL's. For the 75f2 I use the R3M/R3A as it has a 75 frame unencumbered by other frame lines.
As for 28's - I had the Summicron 28 and got rid of it, borrowed one earlier this year to shoot a comparison between the Ultron 28f2 and it - not enough difference (on film at least) to warrant the $2500 difference!
My current "lusting for lens" is the 24mm f3.8 Elmar Asph that Leica showed at Photokina and that I had a chance to shoot with in Louisville. KY during the LHSA meet. Is that ever a good piece of glass! Worked fine on my 0,58 MP too - even without a finder. A 24/35/75 kit with two bodies would work fine for me.
BillBingham2
Registered User
Hey, when I met with Ken before last time it also costed me money: his work with trains brainwashed me enough to go for a dSLR (horror of horrors!!!
Not just any DSLR, a D700 if I remember right! When you fall, you seem to fall hard
I'd have to agree with Tom on the 24/35/75, in the M space it does not get any nicer. While the CV 75 is very reasonably priced, you might want to look up an 85/2 Black Nikkor. Hard to come by but worth it. You could use the 90mm frame lines without too much of an issue (IMHO).
I really do not think a 135 in OM is that much different than carrying your 135 Elm. I'd go with a 180/2.8 and a good 2X or 1.5X converter. I just do not think a 135 reaches out far enough to make a difference. For wider I'd go with the CV 15/4.5, itsy-bitsy so much that you might not know it's in the case.
Hang in there my friend, you're not old, just well seasoned!
B2 (;->
peter_n
Veteran
It has taken me a while but 35/75 lenses with a 24 in the bag is now my standard kit. It really covers most everything I shoot.
Me too! I use two MPs with the same film in each body, a 35 on one and a 75 on the other. Mine are 0.72x and 0.85x mag bodies.