Another M Body - MP / M7 or . . .

M6TTL: for every practical matter it's equivalent to the MP, it costs less than half the price, has Same dial as M7, has metering capabilities, and is relatively new. There you go! 🙂
 
+1 0.85 M7. same ergonomics as what you have, reducing risk of flubs.

alternative: high mag M6 ttl, same ergonomics but cheaper.
 
i would sell the .72 m7 and get a .58 and a .85. one has a better viewfinder for 28mm and 35mm, the other has a better viewfinder for 50mm, 75mm, and 90mm. i'm a genius!
 
ferider said:
Dave, have a look at your M7. I don't like the shape (just middle lines along the 4 edges) of the 90 lines.

With the M3 you have a beautiful large solid rectangle, and with M2/M4 you have middle segments and corners. If you shoot 90 a lot, these are much easier to use than "modern" 90mm framelines. Of course if you use 90 only occasionally it doesn't matter. But I see you running around with one Leica on each shoulder, one having a 35/50 and the other a 90 🙂

Hope that makes sense.

Roland.
Click to expand...

But the spool, Roland. The spool! 🙂 The 90 is a portrait lens, so imo the right-angle corners don't mean as much as the sides and the top. I would pair the M7 with an MP, just to add a mechanical backup to the equation (as was suggested earlier) and get whatever magnification works best for you.


/
 
.85 M7. Put your longest lens at any given moment on that one.

Why are you worrying about batteries and mechanical backups? If I hired you to shoot my wedding, and you didn't bring a case of batteries as spares... seriously. Just like if you were shooting digital and your battery ran out and you didn't have another. Buy a couple bricks of batteries for $50 and always pack them and don't worry about it. Tape a set of spares to each camera strap.

And if your camera DOES completely break, you still have the other one. And probably your digital too.
 
Tim Gray said:
Why are you worrying about batteries and mechanical backups?
Click to expand...

Because **** happens. 🙂 I think the MP is a perfect compliment to the M7—beyond the scope of shooting weddings. If two M7's are great. An M7 and an MP are greater. There's just enough difference between the two to appreciate each and never get tired of either.

/
 
Yep, let's not forget the spool, Ray 🙂

A pic says more than 1000 words ... This is what you see through the M3, Dave.

852087124_q7koK-L.jpg


And let's not forget that for the 1000-2000$ difference when compared to M[7P], you can buy yourself a very nice tele, scanner, or ticket to Hawaii ....

Cheers,

Roland.
 
Last edited:
RayPA said:
Because **** happens. 🙂 I think the MP is a perfect compliment to the M7—beyond the scope of shooting weddings.
Click to expand...

That's why he'll have two cameras 🙂 I'm sure he'll be packing a third or fourth just in case.

I base that comment on two things. First, Dave expressed that he really likes AE. If I shot weddings, I can only imagine I might rely more on AE in changing light, which would mean I'd be using one camera a lot more than the other if one was manual. If this weren't specifically for weddings, I'd agree - get the MP/M6/M3.

Second, I'm not convinced the MP is any more reliable than the M7. I've heard plenty of complaints about MPs and M6s, even ones that were freshly purchased. As you say, **** happens.
 
I don't know all the differences in these different Leicas. But for weddings I go with identical bodies. You only have a single difference, what lens is on it, and it's easy to check. 2c.
 
I'll defer to those with wedding photography experience. If two of the same is better and keeping the 'oops potential' to a minimum works, then so be it. I'm still happy with my M7/MP combo (and happy I don't shoot weddings). 😀



/
 
Dave, you may not like my recommendation...

Worrying over which M-body to purchase for a back-up secondary is a pleasant position to be in. We are a spoiled lot when we wring our hands over the benefits between the beautiful MP or M7 zeitgeist. But for practical considerations, the issue to me would be a change-up in viewfinder magnification than the body.

I had thought about this dilemma for quite some time, before I decided on an M7 with .58 viewfinder, married to the M3 with the .92 patch. Having two bodies with one dedicated to wide(r) lenses, while the other carries the longer, just seems to me to be more important than worrying about whether my battery fails, or which colour body has which film in it.

Keep in mind too, that for your wedding needs, the M3 can now focus a 135mm easier than a .85 body, let alone your .72.

Of course, this means selling your .72 (if you want only two bodies), which is why you may not like what I say above! 😉

(Will you be at MOCA tonight for the Contact Photo kick-off party? If so, let's meet.)
 
I suppose it's about what focal length you want to add to your set-up, and how happy you feel about swapping between different cameras in a stressful situation. It sounds like adding a 90mm is part of your thinking, and that might suggest a higher mag M7 or M6TTL (if you want handling to be identical or very similar) or an M3 for the very best VF for a 90mm.

For what it's worth, I don't seem to find swapping between systems that difficult and I've done B&W only weddings with my 35mm Nokton on the M3 and a pair of Spotmatics carrying a 50/1.4 and a 135/3.5. Not that I wouldnt be using an M7 or two if I could afford it... but maybe if you have nice telephoto glass for the Nikon, a metered SLR body might do just as well?

One other thought; I don't think i would personally value the AE of the M7 above the meter of the M6TTL; especially at weddings (with all those black suits and white dresses) I think I'd be spending half my time dialling in exposure compensation. Certainly with the M3 and spotmatics, I find that a few handheld readings before it kicks off and the Spotmatic's meters to warn me if things have changed too much, combined with the latitude of XP-2, seem to do perfectly well.

Cheers
J
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom