markbrennan
Established
Thanks everyone for the ongoing feedback! No time to post follow up questions or comments now, I' m afraid, but I'll try to check back in. Thanks again!
-Mark
-Mark
markbrennan
Established
Wanted to give an update -
Looked at some MPs today (.72 and .85) at Tamarkin in NYC and was incredibly impressed by the bright finders and smooth shutter and film advance. Jim, I can see what you mean - wow! The M3 is still an option, and is an incredible camera, but I think it's going to be hard to beat the experience I had w/ the MP. Puts me a difficult position, really, when I know it's the camera I want but the price is ridiculous.
Thanks again, everyone.
Regards,
-Mark
Looked at some MPs today (.72 and .85) at Tamarkin in NYC and was incredibly impressed by the bright finders and smooth shutter and film advance. Jim, I can see what you mean - wow! The M3 is still an option, and is an incredible camera, but I think it's going to be hard to beat the experience I had w/ the MP. Puts me a difficult position, really, when I know it's the camera I want but the price is ridiculous.
Thanks again, everyone.
Regards,
-Mark
K
Kyle
Guest
markbrennan said:
Mark,
Another camera you should really give some thought is the Zeiss Ikon. Really, that finder is amazing, better than any Leica I've seen (I admit, I've only seen an M3, M2, M4-P, and a couple M6's, never an M7 or MP). The camera's quality is almost as good as Leica quality at a fraction of the cost ($1300 from Popflash). Don't take it off your list until you've held it in person.
Mackinaw
Think Different
Mark,
I know just what you're going through. I first held an MP in my hands at a camera show early in 2004 and was hooked. As much as I tried to tell myself that I really didn't need this camera, a local camera shop was having the sale of the century late in 2004 (10% less than dealer invoice on all Leica gear) and I ended up buying a black 0.72 MP. All I an tell you that this is the best damn camera I've ever owned and one that I use constantly.
You should also know that you won't be able to sleep normally until you buy an MP. 'Tis a terriible disease, Leica fever.
Jim Bielecki
I know just what you're going through. I first held an MP in my hands at a camera show early in 2004 and was hooked. As much as I tried to tell myself that I really didn't need this camera, a local camera shop was having the sale of the century late in 2004 (10% less than dealer invoice on all Leica gear) and I ended up buying a black 0.72 MP. All I an tell you that this is the best damn camera I've ever owned and one that I use constantly.
You should also know that you won't be able to sleep normally until you buy an MP. 'Tis a terriible disease, Leica fever.
Jim Bielecki
peter_n
Veteran
Welcome back Mark! 
I use a Canonet QL-17 and a couple of modern Leica bodies. I had the Canonet CLA'd by Essex after I got it and I have absolutely no problem with the VF. Yes the one in the Leicas is better defined but I focus in the middle of that rectangle not at the edges and to be honest, I can focus as easily with the Canon as with the Leicas.
The prices of the modern Leica bodies are getting ridiculous, and I think the best bang for your Leica buck given your preferences would be a 0.85 mag M6TTL. One of my M7s is a 0.85 mag and I just love it, focusing 50 mm and 90 mm lenses is definitely easier than with the 0.72 mag body. The 0.85 M6TTL also has 35mm framelines which of course the M3 doesn't have. There was a 0.85 mag M6TTL on sale at photo.net for $1400 - if it hasn't been sold you may be able to bargain...
I use a Canonet QL-17 and a couple of modern Leica bodies. I had the Canonet CLA'd by Essex after I got it and I have absolutely no problem with the VF. Yes the one in the Leicas is better defined but I focus in the middle of that rectangle not at the edges and to be honest, I can focus as easily with the Canon as with the Leicas.The prices of the modern Leica bodies are getting ridiculous, and I think the best bang for your Leica buck given your preferences would be a 0.85 mag M6TTL. One of my M7s is a 0.85 mag and I just love it, focusing 50 mm and 90 mm lenses is definitely easier than with the 0.72 mag body. The 0.85 M6TTL also has 35mm framelines which of course the M3 doesn't have. There was a 0.85 mag M6TTL on sale at photo.net for $1400 - if it hasn't been sold you may be able to bargain...
markbrennan
Established
Kyle, Jim, Peter - thanks for the replies. Good advice, all.
Kyle, interesting to hear again about the ZI (Joe mentioned it, as well). I probably owe it to myself to check it out, but I've sort of been ruling out electronic film cameras; I really want the minimum interface w/ the minimum of controls. Affected? Perhaps. But it really is something I feel strongly about. That's why I love the P. And though the MP puts a meter onboard, there's NOTHING extra. Thus, no M7, or R3a/R2a, etc.
Jim - yeah - you know how I feel! Thanks for sharing your experience.
A question for you is how often you use a 50mm w/ your .72 MP? I'm thinking of posting this question over in the M forum because it's a really important question for me.
My experience focusing w/ the 50 framelines and the .72 MP in the store yesterday was very good; though smaller than my P finder I didn't think the reduced size impacted me in the least. And, as you know, the brightness and contrastiness of that MP finder made focusing w/ a 50 'cron extremely fast - i really was blown away.
The .85 was clearly bigger for the 50 framelines, but I'm not sure how much it buys me. Also, w/ a .85 I lose versatility if I go wider at some point (though right now I'm pretty committed to the 50mm focal length - been shooting it exclusively for close to a year now). Peter, I know you mentioned focusing w/ the .85 is easier, but w/ the MP finder it wasn't THAT big a difference. I should add that I switched to an M7 in the store and found the finder dimmer, somewhat.
Peter - i've held an M6TTL (not yesterday, though), and didn't like the extra height. M6 classics are also an option, and good ones are getting cheaper. However, I think I'd run into the "classic" M6 finder problems at some point - specifically flare.
There are clearly MANY options for me, and w/ a good M, any of them will yield results and considerable shooting pleasure.
Thanks again.
Good weekend -
-Mark
Kyle, interesting to hear again about the ZI (Joe mentioned it, as well). I probably owe it to myself to check it out, but I've sort of been ruling out electronic film cameras; I really want the minimum interface w/ the minimum of controls. Affected? Perhaps. But it really is something I feel strongly about. That's why I love the P. And though the MP puts a meter onboard, there's NOTHING extra. Thus, no M7, or R3a/R2a, etc.
Jim - yeah - you know how I feel! Thanks for sharing your experience.
A question for you is how often you use a 50mm w/ your .72 MP? I'm thinking of posting this question over in the M forum because it's a really important question for me.
My experience focusing w/ the 50 framelines and the .72 MP in the store yesterday was very good; though smaller than my P finder I didn't think the reduced size impacted me in the least. And, as you know, the brightness and contrastiness of that MP finder made focusing w/ a 50 'cron extremely fast - i really was blown away.
The .85 was clearly bigger for the 50 framelines, but I'm not sure how much it buys me. Also, w/ a .85 I lose versatility if I go wider at some point (though right now I'm pretty committed to the 50mm focal length - been shooting it exclusively for close to a year now). Peter, I know you mentioned focusing w/ the .85 is easier, but w/ the MP finder it wasn't THAT big a difference. I should add that I switched to an M7 in the store and found the finder dimmer, somewhat.
Peter - i've held an M6TTL (not yesterday, though), and didn't like the extra height. M6 classics are also an option, and good ones are getting cheaper. However, I think I'd run into the "classic" M6 finder problems at some point - specifically flare.
There are clearly MANY options for me, and w/ a good M, any of them will yield results and considerable shooting pleasure.
Thanks again.
Good weekend -
-Mark
Mackinaw
Think Different
Mark,
I'm guessing that about 75% of the pics I've taken in the past 15 months (when I bought my MP) have been with a Canon 50/1.2. I have no trouble focusing or composing (I shoot a lot between F1.2 and F2.0 and the pics are always sharp). I also have the screw-in 1.25X magnifier which I use with my 90/2.8 but have used with my 50 when the mood strikes. It definitely makes the 50mm area larger.
Take a look at my gallery. Most pics there are with the MP/Canon 50/1.2 combo.
Jim Bielecki
I'm guessing that about 75% of the pics I've taken in the past 15 months (when I bought my MP) have been with a Canon 50/1.2. I have no trouble focusing or composing (I shoot a lot between F1.2 and F2.0 and the pics are always sharp). I also have the screw-in 1.25X magnifier which I use with my 90/2.8 but have used with my 50 when the mood strikes. It definitely makes the 50mm area larger.
Take a look at my gallery. Most pics there are with the MP/Canon 50/1.2 combo.
Jim Bielecki
markbrennan
Established
Thanks, Jim. Good confirmation of what I think is, in fact, the best choice for me: the .72. Thanks for sharing your gallery - nice work. The "5 Beatles" is quite a good use of the 50, I should say - very much my style.
Thanks!
-Mark
Thanks!
-Mark
peter_n
Veteran
Mark I understand what you're saying. I feel the same way - but in the opposite direction. To me the Barnacks are way too small, the M6 and earlier just a little uncomfortably too small. Luckily the newer cameras like the M6TTL and M7 are just right for my hands. To each his own...markbrennan said:
MelanieC
Well-known
I may be an unreliable witness, being a complete novice, but I have a late M3 that's in excellent condition, with a 50/2 Summicron, and just bought a G-III QL17 as a backup camera.
I think these cameras complement each other very well. The thing about the Canonet for me is that it's very similar to the M3 to use, but "not quite" in most respects -- I mean, the film advance is not quite as smooth and pleasant, the viewfinder is not quite as bright and easy to look through, the rangefinder patch is not quite (OK, quite a bit not quite) as bright and defined as the one on my M3. (The film loading on the Canonet is one thing that is quite better.) That kind of thing. But I am totally comfortable going back and forth between the two, and that's saying something since I only started learning how to use rangefinders a couple of months ago. I don't use the meter in the Canonet, and have never used the auto settings, so the experience is comparable in many respects.
I do think getting an M is a great idea, but I might be biased since my M, besides my dogs (who are family), and my laptop (on which all my science resides), is the one possession I have that I am guaranteed to grab before running out of a burning building. I recently had the opportunity to handle a new MP, and while I was suitably impressed I really didn't find it that much brighter or smoother (actually, not smoother at all) than my M3, but my M3 is in much better condition than most so your mileage may vary.
Not quite worth 0.02, but there it is.
I think these cameras complement each other very well. The thing about the Canonet for me is that it's very similar to the M3 to use, but "not quite" in most respects -- I mean, the film advance is not quite as smooth and pleasant, the viewfinder is not quite as bright and easy to look through, the rangefinder patch is not quite (OK, quite a bit not quite) as bright and defined as the one on my M3. (The film loading on the Canonet is one thing that is quite better.) That kind of thing. But I am totally comfortable going back and forth between the two, and that's saying something since I only started learning how to use rangefinders a couple of months ago. I don't use the meter in the Canonet, and have never used the auto settings, so the experience is comparable in many respects.
I do think getting an M is a great idea, but I might be biased since my M, besides my dogs (who are family), and my laptop (on which all my science resides), is the one possession I have that I am guaranteed to grab before running out of a burning building. I recently had the opportunity to handle a new MP, and while I was suitably impressed I really didn't find it that much brighter or smoother (actually, not smoother at all) than my M3, but my M3 is in much better condition than most so your mileage may vary.
Not quite worth 0.02, but there it is.
Last edited: