A few quickie quesitons . . . about M4.

[pizzahut88]

Hi guys,

I've done some homework.
I am in the market for either an M4, or M6.
Please, correct me if I am wrong.

(i) The M4 has both top and bottom copper plate, right?
Each and everyone of them? How do I know from a visual inspection?

(ii) It is meterless, so, my best bet would be the Voightlander VCII meter, right?
Anyone here using this combo?
How accurate is it?

(iii) I've a Leica SF20 flash . . . but the M4 has a cold shoe, right?
How do I work around that?

(iv) Could the top plate be replaced, a la via Leica?
How much am I looking at here?

(v) The myth . . . it is true the M4 was (if not almost) the best M? Before avent of M6?


(vi) I've read elsewhere, most M6 are zinc top plate, only the last ones were copper, right?
How do I tell which is which when picking one up?

(vii) Am I thinking correctly?
If I say 'for a difference of US$500, I would be better off buying an M6. Since buying a VCII meter and the lost of hot shoe, that $500 bucks is worth spending?'

I do use flash sometimes, since I have the SF200 anyway, why spend money on another flash? Needful about 35% of the time. I love balanced fill flash . . .

(viii) In a vaccum, without considering other factors, given the choice, you will pick a copper plate right?

(ix) Its possible to replace the finder unit within the M4 right?
It's not worth it right? Why not get right stuff in the first place, correct?


Lastly, thanks for your help . . .

I am using a Zeiss Ikon, and is hoping to switch to Leica . . .

Nothing wrong is the Ikon, very capable thing.
Been a Contax G user . . . Zeiss user most of my life.

I've never used a Leica before, I think it is now to switch.

The leap . . .

Would love some insight . . . thx.

Manfred

 

[Nikon Bob]

If you are using the new Zeiss Ikon RF I don't think that you will gain much in a practical sense. If you use an M4 use it as is and live with the VF, cold shoe and no meter because to modify it would not be worth it. Used handheld meters are cheap to buy. I own an M4 and live with it as is. If I wanted a built in meter. different frame lines and a hot shoe I would look to an M6 of some variety if staying with Leica. Others I am sure will fill you in on the technical questions you have asked. I just don't see what you would be gaining. OTH try one out before you buy if you can to see if you like them.

Bob

 

[ferider]

Hi Manfred,

Hi guys,
I've done some homework.
I am in the market for either an M4, or M6.
Please, correct me if I am wrong.

(i) The M4 has both top and bottom copper plate, right?
Each and everyone of them? How do I know from a visual inspection?

Brass not copper, all of them, assuming you are not including M4-2 and M4-P.

(ii) It is meterless, so, my best bet would be the Voightlander VCII meter, right?
Anyone here using this combo?
How accurate is it?

The VCII is quite accurate. But I think a hand-held is better.

(iii) I've a Leica SF20 flash . . . but the M4 has a cold shoe, right?
How do I work around that?

You need a sync cable and/or a plug adapter, depending on the cable.

(iv) Could the top plate be replaced, a la via Leica?
How much am I looking at here?

Not sure why you want to do this, unless you buy a beat up user,
but I'm sure Youxin Ye can do this. Will probably cost you around
US 100-150.

(v) The myth . . . it is true the M4 was (if not almost) the best M? Before avent of M6?

Nope. M[23] are better 🙂

(vi) I've read elsewhere, most M6 are zinc top plate, only the last ones were copper, right?
How do I tell which is which when picking one up?

All M6 (classic) have a zinc top plates. The last M6 TTLs are different, not sure
at what serial number that started.

(vii) Am I thinking correctly?
If I say 'for a difference of US$500, I would be better off buying an M6. Since buying a VCII meter and the lost of hot shoe, that $500 bucks is worth spending?'

IMO, the meter is not that important, but the 28mm frameline is, your mileage might vary. There is also the M6 flare issue.

I do use flash sometimes, since I have the SF200 anyway, why spend money on another flash? Needful about 35% of the time. I love balanced fill flash . . .

This by itself might be a good reason to look for an M6 TTL, although a good Auto flash is
very usable on an older M.

(viii) In a vaccum, without considering other factors, given the choice, you will pick a copper plate right?

Sorry, I don't understand the question.

(ix) Its possible to replace the finder unit within the M4 right?
It's not worth it right? Why not get right stuff in the first place, correct?

Only fix it when it's broken. Best,

Roland.

 

[Vickko]

My answers:

I am in the market for either an M4, or M6.
[VK] both are excellent cameras but have different characteristics. The M4 is a classical non-metered camera, the M6 is a basic metered manual camera.

(i) The M4 has both top and bottom copper plate, right?
Each and everyone of them? How do I know from a visual inspection?
[VK] yes, the M4 has brass top and bottom plates. If the finish is worn off, you will see the brass. Otherwise no other indication.


(ii) It is meterless, so, my best bet would be the Voightlander VCII meter, right? Anyone here using this combo? How accurate is it?
[VK] no direct experience, you could also use the MR-4, but it uses mercury batteries which are hard to find. No idea about the accuracy of the VCII meter. In honesty, my recommendation if you use an M4 is to use a good hand-held meter.


(iii) I've a Leica SF20 flash . . . but the M4 has a cold shoe, right?
How do I work around that?
[VK] the M4 has a cold shoe, but does have a flash sync for a cable. I don't know if the SF20 has circuitry to communicate to the camera, and if yes, you would need the M6-TTL version to interwork properly. The first M6 does not have the TTL circuitry nor the TTL flash connections.

(iv) Could the top plate be replaced, a la via Leica?
How much am I looking at here?
[VK] you must be refering to the M4. I doubt that Solms has any more brass M4 top plates, but some of the repair and restoration experts may have them.


(v) The myth . . . it is true the M4 was (if not almost) the best M? Before avent of M6?
[VK] this is open to much debate. The M4 was a high-production but still hand-assembled camera. There are those who feel the M5 was the pinnacle of hand-assembled precision, exceeding even the levels of quality attained by the M4. The M6 is now prone to electronic meter micro-circuitry failure, a completely new failure mode that is not shared by the M4, but affects the M5, although the M5 analog circuitry is more robust than the M6 micro-circuitry.


(vi) I've read elsewhere, most M6 are zinc top plate, only the last ones were copper, right?
How do I tell which is which when picking one up?
[VK] the normal M6 is likely zinc, but special series and some M6 were brass. The black paint M6 special cameras would be brass (LHSA, 2000). There were also M6's with flush windows, which I thought were brass, but I am not certain. Maybe the flush windows were zinc too.

(vii) Am I thinking correctly?
If I say 'for a difference of US$500, I would be better off buying an M6. Since buying a VCII meter and the lost of hot shoe, that $500 bucks is worth spending?'

[VK] it depends on why you are buying the camera. Oh, the M4 does not have the framelines of the M6, like the 28mm and 75mm lines. These did not exist in the timeframe of the M4, or for the 28mm, an individual finder was provided.

I do use flash sometimes, since I have the SF200 anyway, why spend money on another flash? Needful about 35% of the time. I love balanced fill flash . . .

[VK] doesn't the SF20 have a stand-alone auto mode or manual mode? I am not familiar with the flash, but if yes, then you could use the flash, also assuming that it has a cable.

(viii) In a vaccum, without considering other factors, given the choice, you will pick a copper plate right?
[VK] it depends. There isn't anything inherently flawed with either brass or zinc.

(ix) Its possible to replace the finder unit within the M4 right?
It's not worth it right? Why not get right stuff in the first place, correct?
[VK] the M4 finder is superior, because it does not flare like the M6. But the M6 finder has more framelines.


[VK] from your questions, you are really searching for a later series black paint MP. It has it all - metering, flare problem fixed, all the framelines. If you are looking for the classical camera, by all means buy an M4. But the MP is an advanced Leica camera built to the classical standards of the M4, with 35 years of feature improvement (Leica style!) added.

Would love some insight . . . thx.

Manfred

 

[photogdave]

I own and use both. I shoot colour slide in the M4 and I use a ahnd held incident meter (Gossen DigiSix) because it is more accurate than a reflective meter such as in the M6 and the VC Meter.
The material of the top plate is irrelevant and people waste too much time discussing it. Don't use your camera as a hammer and you'll be fine.
I don't use flash on my rfs, on;y my slrs, so I have no opinion either way.
I think the M4 is the best Leica because there are no distracting electronics and superfluous frame lines. The older style vulcanite is better than the newer coverings too.
I had the opportunity to have a Zeiss Ikon in my hands recently. I was very jealous of the viewfinder and AE mode. If I had one of those I doubt I would give it up for a Leica.

 

[Davor]

I think that you are reading way too much into the brass top plates.

 

[Ben Z]

I have both M6 and M4. I have a rebuilt MR4 meter for my M4. It's a little slower than the built in meter of the M6 but not that much. In fact there are times when the M4+MR4 is handier, as I can take a light reading and set the exposure before raising the camera to my eye, which isn't possible with the M6. I always wished it had a second set of LED's on the top deck.

 

[Paul T.]

I have an M4, black paint too, which I consider to be the most beautiful Leica. But it doesn't take my most beautiful photos! I think your ZI will probably be better in that respect.

I know lots of people are obsessed with the Leica as an art/industrial design icon, and that's fine, but if your main criterion is the quality of the photos, the ZI, with its excellent RF, and the option of AE should you need it, will take a lot of beating.

 

[JNewell]

Good arguments for "best" could be made for almost every M camera, from one perspective or another...

On this: "The M6 is now prone to electronic meter micro-circuitry failure, a completely new failure mode that is not shared by the M4, but affects the M5, although the M5 analog circuitry is more robust than the M6 micro-circuitry."

Yes, my 1984 M6 is at DAG's now with circuit problems. However, I've never heard any complaints about the circuitry in an M5 other than corrosion in the battery chamber, which is really operator error. It's true that the battery contact in most Leica cameras could be better designed, but most are functional. As long as the meter cell doesn't drop off the arm on an M5 (extremely rare), you can pretty well assume that everything will hold up.

 

[Vickko]

....... As long as the meter cell doesn't drop off the arm on an M5 (extremely rare), you can pretty well assume that everything will hold up.

Just on the topic of M5 reliability, there was one fatal flaw that was fixed by serial number 134xxxx, of the shutter shaft breaking, due to an inappropriately sized hole in the shaft. I know, as it happened to me. But no other fatal flaws on the M5.

No flaws of that magnitude that I know of on the M4. I've experienced circuitry failure on a brand new MP.

...Vick

 

[.JL.]

Hi guys,

I've done some homework.
I am in the market for either an M4, or M6.
Please, correct me if I am wrong.

(i) The M4 has both top and bottom copper plate, right?
Each and everyone of them? How do I know from a visual inspection?

Manfred,

Brass top and bottom plates, as stated above.

(ii) It is meterless, so, my best bet would be the Voightlander VCII meter, right?
Anyone here using this combo?
How accurate is it?

I use this combo. It works pretty well as long as you know where to point the meter at and how to interpret the meter reading, just like any reflective meter.

(iii) I've a Leica SF20 flash . . . but the M4 has a cold shoe, right?
How do I work around that?

I don't use a flash, and wouldn't recommend it.

(iv) Could the top plate be replaced, a la via Leica?
How much am I looking at here?

Not sure why you want to replace it, but yes, your technician can have it replaced.

(v) The myth . . . it is true the M4 was (if not almost) the best M? Before avent of M6?

Are you trying to associate myths with truth?

(vi) I've read elsewhere, most M6 are zinc top plate, only the last ones were copper, right?
How do I tell which is which when picking one up?

I don't know any M6 classics that has brass top plates. Some Black Paint versions of the M6 TTL have brass top plates, such as the LHSA black paint and Millenium M6 TTL.

(vii) Am I thinking correctly?
If I say 'for a difference of US$500, I would be better off buying an M6. Since buying a VCII meter and the lost of hot shoe, that $500 bucks is worth spending?'

I do use flash sometimes, since I have the SF200 anyway, why spend money on another flash? Needful about 35% of the time. I love balanced fill flash . . .

(viii) In a vaccum, without considering other factors, given the choice, you will pick a copper plate right?

(ix) Its possible to replace the finder unit within the M4 right?
It's not worth it right? Why not get right stuff in the first place, correct?

Market prices don't often work that way. Especially for Leica, it is not a simple arithmetic of adding the worth of each modern feature.

Get the one you like most. It seems that you like the functionality of M6, but prefers the classic build quality of a M4. You seem to like brass bodies, and flash capabilities... Good matches include M6 TTL LHSA black paint and MP.

 

[Rico]

Adding to the good answers already given...

(i) The M4 has both top and bottom copper plate, right?
Yes, if chrome. If black, be aware that Mr Gandy says "Unfortunately later black M4's had the black chrome finish of the concurrently produced M5, instead of the earlier black enamel finish." From web images, the 50th Anniversary M4 appears to be black chrome.

(ii) It is meterless, so, my best bet would be ...
I agree with others about using a handheld: my choice is the Sekonic 308. Sunny 16 also works. 🙂

(v) The myth . . . it is true the M4 was (if not almost) the best M?
I like to think so. If nothing else, you get bragging rights! I would lose the plastic-tipped advance and the canted rewind crank, but those are minor quibbles.

(viii) In a vaccum, without considering other factors, given the choice, you will pick a copper plate right?
The vapor pressure of copper (and presumably brass) is not the lowest. In a vacuum, your camera investment will be more quickly dissipated by sublimation. A better purchase would be the Brückner special-edition M6 with its platinum plating. Pt does not reach a vapor pressure of 1 Pascal until 2330 Kelvin. Plus, you get a nice powder-blue leather covering, instead of M6 textured vinyl.

(ix) Its possible to replace the finder unit within the M4 right?
Frame lines on the M4 end at 35 on the wide end, but the coverage and ease of viewing is superior to the later (standard) models. An external VF for 28 isn't a death sentence.

 

[JNewell]

(i) The M4 has both top and bottom copper plate, right?
Yes, if chrome. If black, be aware that Mr Gandy says "Unfortunately later black M4's had the black chrome finish of the concurrently produced M5, instead of the earlier black enamel finish." From web images, the 50th Anniversary M4 appears to be black chrome.

All top were brass until late M4-P production (identifiable by the flush M6-style windows in the top plate), regardless of whether finished in silver chrome or black chrome.

AFAIK, all bottom plates were and remain brass.

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request