SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
At this point, the M6TTL is the most cost effective choice. They're discontinued, but the production was large enough to find many in the used market. Besides, remember, it was introduced in 2000, which means that even an old one will last you some good 25 years.
I have two... impulse buys. But I don't regret it at all.
I have two... impulse buys. But I don't regret it at all.
peter_n
Veteran
My M6ttl was made in 1998 (first year of production) toward the end of the first of two batches made that year. The first batch was serial nrs. 2466101 - 2470100 and the second 2470301 - 2475300. Mine is serial nr. 2469xxx. No regrets either! 
JoeFriday
Agent Provacateur
Solares... if you have two, then you could lend me one for testing purposes, right buddy?
buddy??
hey, where did he go? LOL
buddy??
hey, where did he go? LOL
T
Todd.Hanz
Guest
Joe,
I had an M6 until someone decided they liked it more, it's a great, ready to shoot camera right out of the box. My wife bought me an M3 for Christmas cause she got tired of me moping around the house, so that is what I shoot now.
When I had the M6 I would point the camera at the back of my hand and meter, I shoot 90% of my stuff at f4 so I would adjust the shutter speed and go shoot.
Now I take my handheld meter and point it at the back of my hand, set the meter for f4 and transfer everything to the camera and go shoot.
Basically the same procedure, I only change settings when the light changes.
I think the M6 is the best deal in Leica M bodies right now, but the M3/M2 are more affordable. Besides the framelines, meter and age the M bodies are pretty much all the same. For the price of an M6 in great shape, you should be able to get an M3/M2 with 50mm summicron and still have money for a meter, unless you need a CLA.
Good luck and keep us informed!
Todd
I had an M6 until someone decided they liked it more, it's a great, ready to shoot camera right out of the box. My wife bought me an M3 for Christmas cause she got tired of me moping around the house, so that is what I shoot now.
When I had the M6 I would point the camera at the back of my hand and meter, I shoot 90% of my stuff at f4 so I would adjust the shutter speed and go shoot.
Now I take my handheld meter and point it at the back of my hand, set the meter for f4 and transfer everything to the camera and go shoot.
Basically the same procedure, I only change settings when the light changes.
I think the M6 is the best deal in Leica M bodies right now, but the M3/M2 are more affordable. Besides the framelines, meter and age the M bodies are pretty much all the same. For the price of an M6 in great shape, you should be able to get an M3/M2 with 50mm summicron and still have money for a meter, unless you need a CLA.
Good luck and keep us informed!
Todd
JoeFriday, my view on camera meters is that there are two main reasons to want an internal meter, otherwise it is just unimportant. One reason is for automatic exposure, which I rather like, especially useful for rapid changes in lighting. The example I recall was at Seattle's Pike Place market (um, 35 years ago!). On the street corner just outside the market there was some political soap-box speechifying that generated some emotional opposition. As I was shooting away, one heckler slugged the speaker, and the tussle moved into the much-darker market area. I cranked the lens open three stops and kept shooting, but I still underexposed by a couple stops, unfortunately. AE would have done well there, or maybe I should just get better at judging light change. BTW, I was using an M2 w/35mm and a Spotmatic w/85mm.
The other reason for an internal meter is for SLRs only, where TTL metering is really useful for macro shots where there are exposure effects due to lens extension, and also when attaching various filters to the lens.
Other than these reasons, I'm pleased to use a separate hand-held meter, mostly in the incident-metering mode. I think it's well worth noting here that once you know what the meter reading is for the light you have, there's no need to keep metering for every shot. When you suspect the light is different than before, check the meter again. This is a fine way to learn more about light and exposure, and what the meter is really telling you. You'll also develop a sense of what is reasonable, and use that as a credibility check when assessing the meter's reading.
Indeed, it's surprising how well one can do just following the exposure recommendations that come with a roll of film, or the cardboard exposure calculator Kodak offers, which are just based on the "Sunny 16" rule: In sunlight, your basic exposure is f/16 with the shutter speed set to the same number as the film's ISO speed. Shade and clouds of various degrees call for set amounts of increased exposure from the Sunny-16 baseline. Indoors is more difficult.
One other point about hand-held metering, and leaving the exposure the same until the light changes... Your negative sequences at the same exposure will be pretty consistent in density, and can be printed with little or no changes in the darkroom. I expect this would be true also for scanning the negs...
JLW makes some very good points. The bottom line is, in my view, that there's no need for the meter in a Leica M6, and you willl not miss its absense in an M2/3/4. The M7, with its AE feature, is a different matter.
The other reason for an internal meter is for SLRs only, where TTL metering is really useful for macro shots where there are exposure effects due to lens extension, and also when attaching various filters to the lens.
Other than these reasons, I'm pleased to use a separate hand-held meter, mostly in the incident-metering mode. I think it's well worth noting here that once you know what the meter reading is for the light you have, there's no need to keep metering for every shot. When you suspect the light is different than before, check the meter again. This is a fine way to learn more about light and exposure, and what the meter is really telling you. You'll also develop a sense of what is reasonable, and use that as a credibility check when assessing the meter's reading.
Indeed, it's surprising how well one can do just following the exposure recommendations that come with a roll of film, or the cardboard exposure calculator Kodak offers, which are just based on the "Sunny 16" rule: In sunlight, your basic exposure is f/16 with the shutter speed set to the same number as the film's ISO speed. Shade and clouds of various degrees call for set amounts of increased exposure from the Sunny-16 baseline. Indoors is more difficult.
One other point about hand-held metering, and leaving the exposure the same until the light changes... Your negative sequences at the same exposure will be pretty consistent in density, and can be printed with little or no changes in the darkroom. I expect this would be true also for scanning the negs...
JLW makes some very good points. The bottom line is, in my view, that there's no need for the meter in a Leica M6, and you willl not miss its absense in an M2/3/4. The M7, with its AE feature, is a different matter.
back alley
IMAGES
remy,
the foot on my pilot is metal not plastic. maybe they sold both?
joe
the foot on my pilot is metal not plastic. maybe they sold both?
joe
richard_l
Well-known
IMO the M6 meter is convenient if a polarizer filter is used (on account of the variable filter factor), or if black and white filters are changed often. Otherwise it's usually better to use a handheld incident meter, for the reasons Doug mentions.Doug said:
Last edited:
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
Joe, The M3 is a fine camera, an M Leica with a built in TTL meter is so handy , and the less gear you have to carry is the way to go.
JoeFriday
Agent Provacateur
ok.. this isn't confusing me at all.. LOL
LOL, Joe... Richard, welcome to RFF! I have to admit I've not used a polarizer on an RF camera. Other filters, yes, and you bring up a good point about metering through the filter.
Certainly there's no reason not to test your own filters with your own hand-held meter to verify the filter factor... Just hold the filter over the meter's cell and note how much difference that makes.
But this reminds me too of another issue not often considered: Does your meter's sensitivity to different light color match that of your film? My Gossen meter has an SBC (Silicon Blue Cell), and is somewhat more sensitive to red light than, say, Tri-X. Following my meter reading in the orange light of incandescent interior light results in modest underexposures, so I need to remember to open-up a half to one stop more. FWIW, Ilford XP2 chromogenic has more sensitivity to red than Tri-X, but still less than the meter.
Certainly there's no reason not to test your own filters with your own hand-held meter to verify the filter factor... Just hold the filter over the meter's cell and note how much difference that makes.
But this reminds me too of another issue not often considered: Does your meter's sensitivity to different light color match that of your film? My Gossen meter has an SBC (Silicon Blue Cell), and is somewhat more sensitive to red light than, say, Tri-X. Following my meter reading in the orange light of incandescent interior light results in modest underexposures, so I need to remember to open-up a half to one stop more. FWIW, Ilford XP2 chromogenic has more sensitivity to red than Tri-X, but still less than the meter.
Spectral Sensitivity
Spectral Sensitivity
This is a good write-up on Spectral Sensitivity of Film and Some older meters. Selenium was great for Photographic Purposes as its Spectral Response is well suited to film. Another reason for a Canon 7 or M3 with MC meter...
Selenium and CDS
And Film
Why I had the M2 out yesterday with the Weston 650 Master I thinking, "This meter matches the Spectral Response of my Film!" A very re-assuring thought indeed...
Spectral Sensitivity
This is a good write-up on Spectral Sensitivity of Film and Some older meters. Selenium was great for Photographic Purposes as its Spectral Response is well suited to film. Another reason for a Canon 7 or M3 with MC meter...
Selenium and CDS
And Film
Why I had the M2 out yesterday with the Weston 650 Master I thinking, "This meter matches the Spectral Response of my Film!" A very re-assuring thought indeed...
Last edited:
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Joe, I have two bodies, but only one is fully reliable. The other has a light leak, which, hopefully, will be fixed soon. Not everything is perfect...
peter_n
Veteran
richard_l welcome to the forum!
Brian thanks for the links.
Brian thanks for the links.
richard_l
Well-known
Thanks for the welcome, Doug.
My Gossen Digisix uses an SBC. Nowadays I'm shooting mostly landscapes with XP2 and it works pretty well, but thanks for the warning about incandescent lighting. (The blue sensitivity of Tri-X makes it tricky to use for landscapes.)
My Gossen Digisix uses an SBC. Nowadays I'm shooting mostly landscapes with XP2 and it works pretty well, but thanks for the warning about incandescent lighting. (The blue sensitivity of Tri-X makes it tricky to use for landscapes.)