foto_fool
Well-known
aizan said:
Sir, I will thank you to keep your Coche-Dury. Please make mine a 1993 Bonneau du Martray Corton rouge. Rouge, mind you - not blanc. I have had the blanc and it is just not to my taste - adequate, certainly, as an entry-level wine, but nothing like serious enough for contemplative enjoyment. Now the BdM rouge - THERE's a wine!
Besides, everyone knows the ZI has the best viewfinder.
- John
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
thomasw_
Well-known
maddoc said:
Wide FLs: I assume you mean the mp .58 VF? If so I would agree. But if you mean the .72 MP VF, then I would give a tie between it and M2. I find shooting the 28mm FL on my M2 to yield spectacular to satisfying results just using the entire VF to estimate.
50 mm & > FLs: The M3 VF is preferable -- if in good condition -- due the magnification and EBL's ease of focussing. Remember: [SIZE=-1]Baselength x Magnification = EBL. [/SIZE]
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
maddoc
... likes film again.
I agree with you about the MP .72 VF and M2 regarding 28mm. But 50mm & > FL: I would miss the 75mm framelines. I sold my 90mm Elmarit since the FL doesn`t do it for me and want to give the 75mm a try. So the MP is the better choice for me.thomasw_ said:
Bully
Established
In my subjective opinion the pinnacle of the whole M family is the MP.
But "The Workhorse" for sure is the M6.
Greetings
Bully
But "The Workhorse" for sure is the M6.
Greetings
Bully
dll927
Well-known
I've read many items on this subject, and it often seems that the first attempt was the charm. So many often come back to the M3 as the winner of the pack. I have an M4-2, which came along a good bit later, and has sometimes been denigrated as a lower-quality camera than some of its predecessors.
I don't have an M7 or an MP, but I keep wondering why the MP is so many peoples' choice. As a current model, along with M7 (M8 is different), some must like the fact that it's more like the earlier models with no meter. Between the two, I think I'd choose the M7.
When I say "so many", I'm keeping in mind the present-day prices. "So many" is probably NOT very many!!
I don't have an M7 or an MP, but I keep wondering why the MP is so many peoples' choice. As a current model, along with M7 (M8 is different), some must like the fact that it's more like the earlier models with no meter. Between the two, I think I'd choose the M7.
When I say "so many", I'm keeping in mind the present-day prices. "So many" is probably NOT very many!!
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Glad to see a modern M has come to the front of the pack since I last checked. I guess us old dogs....
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Once again, proud to be in the minority. 
Always remember, folks: cameras are like football. Being a fan of Arsenal/Hertha/Feijenoord/Leica M[23P] is being with the masses. Being a Fulham/Union/Sparta/Leica M5 fan means challenges for characters.
Philipp
Always remember, folks: cameras are like football. Being a fan of Arsenal/Hertha/Feijenoord/Leica M[23P] is being with the masses. Being a Fulham/Union/Sparta/Leica M5 fan means challenges for characters.
Philipp
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
Joop van Heijgen
Established
Bully said:
The Leica M3; M4 en de M5 are the best M cameras ever made!
In fact are all these cameras of the Wetzlar period!
The quality of material, 'handmade in Germany' and the precision are in fact no more repeated in the years after '75!
The MP is a reminder of the 'old' days of Wetzlar. If the quality is the same like the old M3 is difficult to be answered!
Bully
Established
The built quality
The built quality
Hello Hoop,
I´ve got to disagree! The "Fairy Tale" of the "good old manufacturing" until the seventies will always be with us... but it is nothing more than a "Fairy Tale".
If you ever had the possibility to keep an M3, M2, M5, M4-2, M4-P, M6, M7, MP and now the M8 in direct comparison you should have realized, that there was a little (but only a LITTLE) lost of built quality with the M4-2 and M4-P. They were made until the company was in financial trouble and the M-Line was shipped to Canada. But the Canada-Models M4-2 and M4-P have also the special aura of every M.
The newer models, especially the M7, MP and M8 are of a built quality never reached by any earlier model.
With the modern technologies (especially CNC) Leica reached an accuracy in manufacturing the models never before possible.
Greetings
Bully
The built quality
Hello Hoop,
I´ve got to disagree! The "Fairy Tale" of the "good old manufacturing" until the seventies will always be with us... but it is nothing more than a "Fairy Tale".
If you ever had the possibility to keep an M3, M2, M5, M4-2, M4-P, M6, M7, MP and now the M8 in direct comparison you should have realized, that there was a little (but only a LITTLE) lost of built quality with the M4-2 and M4-P. They were made until the company was in financial trouble and the M-Line was shipped to Canada. But the Canada-Models M4-2 and M4-P have also the special aura of every M.
The newer models, especially the M7, MP and M8 are of a built quality never reached by any earlier model.
With the modern technologies (especially CNC) Leica reached an accuracy in manufacturing the models never before possible.
Greetings
Bully
anna missed
Member
Alas, still no Leica CL. How would Cartier Bresson have voted? Its been my favorite Leica too, for several decades and never once had one fail me for mechanical reasons. So there!
Joop van Heijgen
Established
Bully said:
'The newer models, especially the M7, MP and M8 are of a built quality never reached by any earlier model.'
These camera types of Leica were never more so much in repair!
Read the German customer forum of Leica!!
The R8 en R9 are the biggest 'trouble' cameras Leica has ever made!
It is the greatest 'Fairy Tale' that the present Leica generation has the same or has even a better quality than as long before (Wetzlar period)!
Greetings,
Joop van Heijgen (Rotterdam)
Last edited:
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
I voted for the M2 for a simple reason - of all my M's, the ones I use most are the M2's. It is not snobbery or disdain for the other versions, but my prime lens is either a 35mm or currently the 40 nokton's. The M6/MP's are very good, particularly the MP's with 0,58 finders for 35. But over the years of shooting Tri X I have establsihed a highly indvidualized exposure system that takes in factors like what developer I am currently using, what is the prime subject look I want and other, sometimes rather vague adjustments to my exposures. With the diodes flashing in the finder of the M6 and MP, it distracts me. I find that if I am shooting with a M2 and a M6, my M6 exposures might be better but my response time is slowed down! OK, so some of my exposures with the M2 are not great (i didn't say that my highly individulized exposure system is perfect!), but I can shoot faster with M2's.
Mechanically the latest MP is most likely the best built camera that Leica has offered. They are exceedingly smooth and "tight". I used to work with original MP's from 1957 (this was in the early 60's) and it was a very rough camera to use. The case hardened steel gears might last long time, but smooth they were not. It always felt it was filled with gravel.
The Canadian made M4-2 and M4-P did get a bum rap. The first couple of 100 M4-2's had a problem with shutter bounce and also when you used the original version of the M4-2 power winder. Later they fixed them and when the M4-P came out - no more problems. I still have one of my first M4 P's from 1980 (very early #1548... and it has lived a hard life. For years it was the test bench in my shop for adjusting and testing Rapidwinders. It has probably had the equivalent of 30-40 000 rolls run through it. It did need service after about 6 years when the winder drive train fell out of it! A couple of years ago I retired it and now I only use it as a back-up to the M6/M6TTL and MP test-cameras.
Oh yes, I do carry a small Gossen meter in my pocket for incident meter readings when I feel it is necessary. Oh hell, nobody is perfect!
Mechanically the latest MP is most likely the best built camera that Leica has offered. They are exceedingly smooth and "tight". I used to work with original MP's from 1957 (this was in the early 60's) and it was a very rough camera to use. The case hardened steel gears might last long time, but smooth they were not. It always felt it was filled with gravel.
The Canadian made M4-2 and M4-P did get a bum rap. The first couple of 100 M4-2's had a problem with shutter bounce and also when you used the original version of the M4-2 power winder. Later they fixed them and when the M4-P came out - no more problems. I still have one of my first M4 P's from 1980 (very early #1548... and it has lived a hard life. For years it was the test bench in my shop for adjusting and testing Rapidwinders. It has probably had the equivalent of 30-40 000 rolls run through it. It did need service after about 6 years when the winder drive train fell out of it! A couple of years ago I retired it and now I only use it as a back-up to the M6/M6TTL and MP test-cameras.
Oh yes, I do carry a small Gossen meter in my pocket for incident meter readings when I feel it is necessary. Oh hell, nobody is perfect!
Damaso
Photojournalist
Just Wondering....
Just Wondering....
Hey Tom, feel like parting with that M4-P? Just a new member and young photojournalist making a harmless inquiry....
Just Wondering....
Hey Tom, feel like parting with that M4-P? Just a new member and young photojournalist making a harmless inquiry....
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Damaso said:Hey Tom, feel like parting with that M4-P? Just a new member and young photojournalist making a harmless inquiry....
Sorry, but no. It is one of the few cameras that i have a certain sentimental attachment to. It was my prime camera when we lived in Paris in 82/83 and later travelled in Australia in 86/87.
Tom
Talus
pan sin sal
M6TTL simply because it's my first Leica and it's been so much better than I expected. Not a good answer yes, but it's what I got.