boomguy57
Well-known
I'd recommend a zeiss ikon. Had one and loved it and it's a lot cheaper than the m7.
Can of Worms: Nikon FE2 or Leica M7?
- Thread starter David_Manning
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 99
- Views 15K
David_Manning
Well-known
Yes I know, totally different systems with a capital T.
Thing is, I can get there from here with either one. On the practical side, the Nikon sits, ready, willing, and definitely able. On the emotional/fuzzy side, the M7 pushes my mental buttons.
The question for me is, am I willing to give up a few more useful features (for me) to satisfy the Leica M urge?
Please keep the opinions coming.
Another question...If I use a two- or three-stop ND filter and artificially set ISO as an "equalizer" for the shutter speed limitation, will I have the red light blinking in the finder constantly?
Thing is, I can get there from here with either one. On the practical side, the Nikon sits, ready, willing, and definitely able. On the emotional/fuzzy side, the M7 pushes my mental buttons.
The question for me is, am I willing to give up a few more useful features (for me) to satisfy the Leica M urge?
Please keep the opinions coming.
Another question...If I use a two- or three-stop ND filter and artificially set ISO as an "equalizer" for the shutter speed limitation, will I have the red light blinking in the finder constantly?
filmfan
Well-known
You have an SLR with high shutter speed and auto-exposure w/ 28 and 50mm lenses already. Perfect. Now what you need is a camera that fills in the gaping hole that is missing-- a mechanical rangefinder with a 35mm lens. There.
SLR for flexibility (AE, lens choices) and high shutter speed shooting (wide open in good light), and rangefinder for simplicity (mechanical, one lens) and low shutter speed shooting.
This is my personal camera philosophy.
SLR for flexibility (AE, lens choices) and high shutter speed shooting (wide open in good light), and rangefinder for simplicity (mechanical, one lens) and low shutter speed shooting.
This is my personal camera philosophy.
hepcat
Former PH, USN
Dave, I've been shooting since 1970. I was using Leica by 1974. I've had and sold a half-dozen Leica kits over the years, M3, M3, M4 and M4-2. I sold the last M4 kit in 2002-ish for a DSLR outfit. In digital, I went from body to body; the Panasonic DMC-L1, and later the Fuji X-Pro1 in search of that Leica "feel." I found out that the only way to get that style of working is by paying the price of admission. I have recently re-acquired my Leica kit and the DSLR stuff is down the road. Like you, aside from all of the "practical" reasons to buy a Leica body it "pushes my buttons" too. I've described shooting with one of my M bodies as feeling like I've "come home." They're comfortable and just feel "right."
Your Nikon will do the job just fine but I expect that, because you started this thread, you want someone to say "buy the Leica because" and give you a good, solid logical argument for it. There isn't any. If you are just looking to make the images, use the Nikon. You already have it. If you want to make the images and get that "feel" you enjoyed with your M6 while you do it, then buy the body. Yes, they're stupidly expensive, but that's what insurance is for. Buy the body, use it and enjoy it. 😉
J. Borger
Well-known
I shoot Nikon f3 and fm3a and Leica M6.
In my opinion a Leica is only suitable for 35mm and 50mm lenses.
Yes they have optical the best wide-angle lenses in the world but unless you use an external finder (which i hate) you can.t judge wide angle perspective with a rf camera. At least i can not.
The nikon 28/2,8 ais is perhaps my all time favourite lens, any brand or format considered. For me reason enough to stick to Nikon for 28mm.
When i shoot 35mm film i mostly carry a nikon with 28mm 2,8 ais and m6 with 50mm summilux. Best of both worlds.
I can only tell the difference in prints between the Nikon and Leica from the perspective. The Leica magic is way overrated imho.
If you feel more comfortable with a rf instead of an slr buy the m7.
I had a 28mm summicron for my Leica. In many ways a superiour lens to the Nikon, but it did not suit me because i need a slr to make nice pictures wih a wide-angle lens. So there are a lot of factors to consider making your choice.
In my opinion a Leica is only suitable for 35mm and 50mm lenses.
Yes they have optical the best wide-angle lenses in the world but unless you use an external finder (which i hate) you can.t judge wide angle perspective with a rf camera. At least i can not.
The nikon 28/2,8 ais is perhaps my all time favourite lens, any brand or format considered. For me reason enough to stick to Nikon for 28mm.
When i shoot 35mm film i mostly carry a nikon with 28mm 2,8 ais and m6 with 50mm summilux. Best of both worlds.
I can only tell the difference in prints between the Nikon and Leica from the perspective. The Leica magic is way overrated imho.
If you feel more comfortable with a rf instead of an slr buy the m7.
I had a 28mm summicron for my Leica. In many ways a superiour lens to the Nikon, but it did not suit me because i need a slr to make nice pictures wih a wide-angle lens. So there are a lot of factors to consider making your choice.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Exactly. And they're not as expensive as endlessly buying and selling second-rate kit that isn't *really* what you want. My old M2 probably stands me in $10-15 a year -- over 30+ years.
Cheers,
R. (Shooting Leicas since 1969)
nobbylon
Veteran
Get the M7 and a 28/50 combo IF you prefer the pics that Leica lenses produce, if not then save a lot and stick with the Nikon.
I love the autofocus speed and sharpness of my Nikon lenses BUT I still prefer the look I get from Leica lenses. I don't use M any longer but I do use R for film.
I tend to pick lenses I like to use and then pick a body that suits it.
I love the autofocus speed and sharpness of my Nikon lenses BUT I still prefer the look I get from Leica lenses. I don't use M any longer but I do use R for film.
I tend to pick lenses I like to use and then pick a body that suits it.
kdemas
Enjoy Life.
David- I have had a M7/FM3a combo and like them both. I had to get rid of the M7 for financial reasons and I still enjoy using the FM3a with various 50mm lenses primarily.
That said I do prefer rangefinders for street shooting. A Hexar RF might fit the bill for you...M mount rangefinder with 1/4000th shutter. I enjoyed using it with a nice old 50 Cron collapsible when I last had it, terrific camera. Just don't break it, it will most likely have to be sent to Japan for repair.
Whatever you decide, enjoy!
Kent
PS- As far as the M7 goes, I had a .85 MP finder version. Superb for a 50.
That said I do prefer rangefinders for street shooting. A Hexar RF might fit the bill for you...M mount rangefinder with 1/4000th shutter. I enjoyed using it with a nice old 50 Cron collapsible when I last had it, terrific camera. Just don't break it, it will most likely have to be sent to Japan for repair.
Whatever you decide, enjoy!
Kent
PS- As far as the M7 goes, I had a .85 MP finder version. Superb for a 50.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Bottom Line I don't think it Matters...
Your a Good Photographer no matter which Camera You pick up
I suppose it's just a Question of which You 'FEEL' most comfortable with...
That will enhance Your shooting
Your a Good Photographer no matter which Camera You pick up
I suppose it's just a Question of which You 'FEEL' most comfortable with...
That will enhance Your shooting
Rvl
Member
I like Leica and Rolex and Mercedes
BUT I never liked when people came up to me and said "You are rich" or "I pay you too much money" or "my grandfather had one of those"
Now I use a Nikon s2 , Nikon F and a Fuji XPro1
I drive a Honda
And I have 2 Omega watches
BUT I never liked when people came up to me and said "You are rich" or "I pay you too much money" or "my grandfather had one of those"
Now I use a Nikon s2 , Nikon F and a Fuji XPro1
I drive a Honda
And I have 2 Omega watches
kdemas
Enjoy Life.
Frontman
Well-known
I simply like how the Leica M feels and operates. Maybe it is magic, or maybe it is something else. I have tried the Hexar, and ZI, but they are simply rangefinder cameras, not Leicas. The Nikon S rangefinders have a bit of magic of their own, and my usual carry-around kit consists of a Leica M with a 50mm, and a Nikon S3 with a 21mm and finder.
My first "real" camera was a Nikon FE, and, technically speaking, Leica has never produced a film camera which comes close to it. The FE can shoot manually or automatically, has a wide range of shutter speeds (it will shoot faster than 1/4000 in auto), and SLR focusing will always be more accurate than rangefinder focusing, with no need to calibrate your camera to focus precisely with a fast lens.
But, regardless of the features of the FE, I still get more enjoyment using old rangefinder cameras.
My first "real" camera was a Nikon FE, and, technically speaking, Leica has never produced a film camera which comes close to it. The FE can shoot manually or automatically, has a wide range of shutter speeds (it will shoot faster than 1/4000 in auto), and SLR focusing will always be more accurate than rangefinder focusing, with no need to calibrate your camera to focus precisely with a fast lens.
But, regardless of the features of the FE, I still get more enjoyment using old rangefinder cameras.
Steve Bellayr
Veteran
Get the M6 and save a few dollars. Use the savings for a 50mm Summicron and you will set.
TEZillman
Well-known
Dave,
You're talking about choosing between my two favorite camera bodies. I have one of each and I often have a hard time choosing between them. As far as advantages in favor of the M7, I find that in low light it's far easier to see the LED in the M7 than to see the needle in the FE2. I also get what you're saying about feeling more serious when using a Leica. As you do not see exactly what the lens is, I find myself thinking more about setting the aperture and focus to get what I envision the photo to look like than I do when I'm using the FE2. One major advantage I find with the M7 is the AE lock. Just a slight preasure on the shutter release locks the AE while you need to press the self timer lever in with one finger while pushing the shutter with the other on the FE2. It's faster and takes less thought with the M7. There are obviously advantages and disadvantages with both types of systems. Yes, the little light contiuously blinks if you have the ISO set to another setting or use the exposure compensation. You get used to it. It does remind you that you have it set differently. I have a chrome M7 and a black Nikon. I kind of like the chrome, but it doesn't matter too much. Good luck with your decision.
You're talking about choosing between my two favorite camera bodies. I have one of each and I often have a hard time choosing between them. As far as advantages in favor of the M7, I find that in low light it's far easier to see the LED in the M7 than to see the needle in the FE2. I also get what you're saying about feeling more serious when using a Leica. As you do not see exactly what the lens is, I find myself thinking more about setting the aperture and focus to get what I envision the photo to look like than I do when I'm using the FE2. One major advantage I find with the M7 is the AE lock. Just a slight preasure on the shutter release locks the AE while you need to press the self timer lever in with one finger while pushing the shutter with the other on the FE2. It's faster and takes less thought with the M7. There are obviously advantages and disadvantages with both types of systems. Yes, the little light contiuously blinks if you have the ISO set to another setting or use the exposure compensation. You get used to it. It does remind you that you have it set differently. I have a chrome M7 and a black Nikon. I kind of like the chrome, but it doesn't matter too much. Good luck with your decision.
Mark T
Established
If you are using B&W film and are also using filters, the Leica will have the advantage of seeing things as they are while through the Nikon everything will be yellow/orange/red etc.
Pioneer
Veteran
Use the Nikon
Use the Nikon
I love my Leica M6, and I do understand that "serious" feeling you describe. It really is a wonderful system and the glass is magnificent. But when push comes to shove, and I feel I "have" to get a specific photo, I grab my Pentax LX. I am so totally comfortable with it I have complete confidence in my ability to get the shots I need.
I don't know if it helps, but you sound very comfortable with your Nikon and the lenses you use with it. I read a real confidence in your post that you know you can get the shots you want. I could be wrong but I don't read that same confidence when it comes to using the M7.
Please, buy one. You will love working with it. But this may not be the right time to do it.
Use the Nikon
I love my Leica M6, and I do understand that "serious" feeling you describe. It really is a wonderful system and the glass is magnificent. But when push comes to shove, and I feel I "have" to get a specific photo, I grab my Pentax LX. I am so totally comfortable with it I have complete confidence in my ability to get the shots I need.
I don't know if it helps, but you sound very comfortable with your Nikon and the lenses you use with it. I read a real confidence in your post that you know you can get the shots you want. I could be wrong but I don't read that same confidence when it comes to using the M7.
Please, buy one. You will love working with it. But this may not be the right time to do it.
Contarama
Well-known
I have the nicest F2 Eye-level body with 105/2.5 that matches it and I would take a MP over a Nikon any day of the week. But I'm just saying... 🙂
One thing the M7 will give you over the FE2 is a much quieter shutter sound.
There are however a few things about the M7 that cause me not to have 100% confidence in it like I do in my FM3A.
* The M7's DX reader can be a bit flaky. Mostly it works (I have experience with both a mechanical and optical DX reader) but sometimes it doesn't and a dot inside the finder blinks constantly to let you know its not reading the DX code.T
* The M7's exposure compensation is very poorly implemented, and when used that darn dot inside the finder blinks constantly. So you don't know whether the DX reader is reading the DX code or not.
* If you shoot film that doesn't have a DX code, you can set the ISO on the ISO dial, but once again you have that blinking dot.
My FM3A, on the other hand, doesn't do any of that. It just works. The faster shutter speeds, higher flash synch speed, and a metal shutter you don't need to worry about burning a hole in are also nice.
BUT if you're lusting for a Leica, nothing else will do. But maybe an M6 or MP instead of an M7.
There are however a few things about the M7 that cause me not to have 100% confidence in it like I do in my FM3A.
* The M7's DX reader can be a bit flaky. Mostly it works (I have experience with both a mechanical and optical DX reader) but sometimes it doesn't and a dot inside the finder blinks constantly to let you know its not reading the DX code.T
* The M7's exposure compensation is very poorly implemented, and when used that darn dot inside the finder blinks constantly. So you don't know whether the DX reader is reading the DX code or not.
* If you shoot film that doesn't have a DX code, you can set the ISO on the ISO dial, but once again you have that blinking dot.
My FM3A, on the other hand, doesn't do any of that. It just works. The faster shutter speeds, higher flash synch speed, and a metal shutter you don't need to worry about burning a hole in are also nice.
BUT if you're lusting for a Leica, nothing else will do. But maybe an M6 or MP instead of an M7.
Contarama
Well-known
Personally I feel the FM2/T is the best deal for the money in the camera universe right now. But alas I lead the thread astray and open a can of worms.
rkm
Well-known
What's special/beneficial about the FM2 T/itanium compared to say, an FM3A?
Similar threads
