M4-P compared to M6

[sparrow6224]

Absent the meter and its various advantages and hindrances, are there any engineering factors, materials, or mechanical features that make the M6 a superior instrument to the M4-P? I'm pondering which to set my sights on, having had to sell a beautiful M6TTL a while back and now missing it, having owned an M4-P for a while that I liked, and money still being a problem. I'd love to know what the real differences are.

 

[sparrow6224]

PS The main reason I'm hankering after one of these cameras, besides the usual camera lust, is for the 28 and 75 framelines. I use 25, 28, and 75 quite a bit right now.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Get an M4-P with a brass top (almost all of them) since the brass will not oxidize into a powder if you scratch a deep groove in the metal. The M6 top covers are zinc and if you scratch through the black chrome you risk getting a hole in the metal. Now, I don't know if this has happened to any zinc cameras but I've seen the deep pitting in other applications where zinc is allowed to oxidize.
And I'm just personally a bigger fan of brass, so there's my real bias.

Phil Forrest

 

[sparrow6224]

Ah, does that explain the bubbling black paint on so many models??

 

[ferider]

I have an M4-P with brass top (most models) and one with Zinc top (quite rare); also an M6. The brass will not corrode (most zinc top M4P/M6 bodies dont either), however it is softer than the zinc when the camera is dropped (brass dings, zinc cracks).

Besides the meter, I feel the only practical difference is the size of the framelines, 35 and 50mm lines are slightly larger in the M4P (in both my models) when compared to the M6.

When you shoot 75mm, the M6 framelines are much nicer on the other hand, the M4P only has dots in the corners.

Roland.

 

[sparrow6224]

From what I understand, the only way the M4-P 35mm and 50mm framelines could be larger and still be true to the focal lengths in question would be if the M4-P VF had a longer baseline (is that the right term?) than the M6's 0.72 (cm?). Unless you have the 0.58 M6 viewfinder. Someone knowledgeable should step in and stop me before I type again.

 

[Mark C]

With either I think it is worth looking for one that has had the MP rangefinder upgrade. Some people don't mind or even notice the flare, but I shoot a lot of available light situations that seem to trigger it.

 

[Tom A]

The M4P and the early M6 was basically the same camera - apart from the battery chamber and the meter circuit/back door.
The last batch of M4P's had the zinc top-plate (flush windows). I have not seen any serious problem with either the M6 or M4P zinc top-plates - apart from some discoloration after heavy use. The major problem happened with some of the R series cameras were the black chrome could "bubble" off.
I also do prefer the brass top-plates - mainly because they "flex" a bit if dropped or bashed up. The zinc can actually crack if hit hard. The flush windows also was a magnet for finger-prints!!!!

 

[maggieo]

I wish my M9-P had M4-P style windows. I get sick of looking at my fingerprint!

 

[Pioneer]

I wish my M9-P had M4-P style windows. I get sick of looking at my fingerprint!

Well don't put your finger there when you are looking through the viewfinder. 😀

 

[lam]

I owned a late M4-P, which had the M6 windows, Zinc top plate, and compared to my M6's it had the same rangefinder patch flare, same feeling winding film advance, same everything frankly minus the meter.

That's why I ended up just getting another M6.

 

[sleepyhead]

I have two M4-Ps (brass tops). I don't like having the built in reflectance meter of the M6, prefer a handheld incidence meter. So for me, the small red LEDs in the M6 are only a distraction.

 

[sparrow6224]

Why did they switch from brass to zinc?

 

[rlouzan]

My favorite M body is the M4-P with brass top plate.
The only problem with the M4-P is VF fog, because of glue outgassing, that must be cleaned approx. every 10 years + the M4-P is slightly more reliable than some M6 classic bodies (frame counters ...)

 

[ottluuk]

From what I understand, the only way the M4-P 35mm and 50mm framelines could be larger and still be true to the focal lengths in question would be if the M4-P VF had a longer baseline (is that the right term?) than the M6's 0.72 (cm?). Unless you have the 0.58 M6 viewfinder. Someone knowledgeable should step in and stop me before I type again.

The viewfinder magnification, base length and optics are exactly the same between M4-P and .72 M6. The M6 frame lines are simply smaller so they are more foolproof when shooting close up: harder to cut something off. Many consider the 35mm frame in M6 and newer bodies to be more appropriate for a 40mm lens.

 

[mugent]

I used to own and M6, and now I have an m4-2. It's supposed to be 'cheap' Leica, but in reality, the build of the two are indistinguishable, a collector might care about zinc and brass, but as a user it's irrelevant.
Obviously there is the meter in the M6, but I've begun to prefer meter less, it makes me slow down and think about what I'm doing, which is a really good thing.

 

[ray*j*gun]

I had a brass M6 and a brass M4-p and I liked the M4-p better since I don't use in camera meters often. But later I got a good deal on a mint M2 and it blew them both away in terms of smooth tight and quit performance.

 

[jordanstarr]

I only like the M6TTL marginally better than my M4-P in all honesty. The real thing for me is the meter. I don't focus on the lines...lines are lines...if you're going to worry so much about accuracy of the edges of the frame, buy an SLR....the idea is to shoot quick. If money is tight, I could live with an M4-P and still be VERY VERY happy for the rest of my life. They feel different to shoot, but I don't really like one or the other better in that respect.

 

[peterm1]

When I was shooting an M4P regularly I found it liberating. No meter- so what! I found that a hand held meter was fine. A quick check of the ambient lighting was all that was needed in most situations. Open up one stop when moving into shadow and close down one stop when the sun came out from behind clouds. The natural flexibility of color film took care of the rest. Great photographers like HCB who were doing it constantly got to the point where they could pick the correct exposure without needing any kind of meter. To tell the truth the M4P did have some deficiencies. Many, including me found that the flash sync ports would fall to pieces after a few years as they were poorly engineered. This always bothered me as a Leica should not have cheap plastic parts that break - but the M4P did!

 

[ferider]

From what I understand, the only way the M4-P 35mm and 50mm framelines could be larger and still be true to the focal lengths in question would be if the M4-P VF had a longer baseline (is that the right term?) than the M6's 0.72 (cm?). Unless you have the 0.58 M6 viewfinder. Someone knowledgeable should step in and stop me before I type again.

M4P frame-lines are made for 1m min focus and negatives (similar to M2 and M4), M6 for 0.7m min focus and slides. Baseline and magnification of M4P are the same when compared to 0.72 M6.

Like this for 50mm (M4P 50mm frameline size is like M2)

(note that the M6 above had 75mm framelines removed)

Roland.