Earliest (best value) M with decent internal meter?

P

photorat

Registered Abuser
Local time
6:44 AM
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
173
Location
Belgium
View My Gallery
Recently acquired a M2 which I love to bits but am increasingly frustrated by too many missed or poorly exposed shots due to fumbling with unreliable hand-held meters.

Although it probably means sacrificing build quality and hence durability, what is the next step up from the M2 with a decent (likely to be still working) TTL meter? I've heard the MP has an outstanding internal meter but really don't want to fork out that much cash. So I guess I'm looking at one of the later M4's. Any suggestions?

Thanks in advance!
 
No.

M4s are meterless.

The internal meter came with the M5 (and CL).

For bangs per buck you should look for a "classic" M6. If you can, go for a later model with the anti-rub inserts - earlier models have had reports of meter failure due to circuit board corrosion. Be aware that the earlier m6es are also prone to "Zinkfass", or zinc-rot in which the top plate appears pitted and bubbly.

Regards,

Bill
 
Another vote for the M5, not the same animal as your M2, but Wetzlar quality and a great meter. Don't be too freaked by the battery voltage thing, it's not a big deal.
 
hahahahaha ...
sorry for laughing out . but ... the issue is not whether the meter is builtin or not. the issue is, whether you are able to SEE the light change.

please don't mistake me. i do not read the light often enough myself, so who am i to laugh? but i trully believe, that if you do not get the right reading externally - why should you get it more often with a builtin meter?

anyway, just forget what i wrote, and go ahead, an M5 or M6 may prove to you what my words won't be able to tell.

🙂
cheers
s.
 
Point taken. I'm sure I would get better at metering with practice. Just not sure I want to go through the heartbreak of hundreds of could-have-been-brilliant-if-only photos in the meantime.

I think internal meters have a few advantages over hand helds. For one the meter is right there where you need it and not zipped up in a case in your hip pocket. Secondly, it meters what you expose and not the big arse sky around it (many of my first shots with the M2 are under-exposed and yes, again, I could learn to correct that by, for instance, pointing the meter at and around the subject and taking a weighted average or even just the lowest exposure value given that b/w film is better over-exposed than under-exposed).

Of course, you still need to compensate for high-contrast situations (backlit subjects, etc.) and "SEE the light change", etc. but at least with an internal meter you're in the same ball park to start with.

sebastel said:
the issue is not whether the meter is builtin or not. the issue is, whether you are able to SEE the light change.

if you do not get the right reading externally - why should you get it more often with a builtin meter?
Click to expand...

Thanks everyone for all the fast replies so far! I've always been intrigued by the M5. At least it doesn't have an ugly red dot. 😱
 
M6 for size and similarity to M2. Or a CV mini meter ? But I'm with S.
This might not help you. Sounds more like a pilot than a tool problem.

Also, maybe you want to consider a Bessa, Hexar RF or ZI with Auto-exposure ?

Roland.
 
Early Leica M6 (Wetzlar NOT Solms) that`s a really good choice and that`s the M I`ve been shooting with one since the early 1990`s - with never a problem "😀

Tom
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, conflicting info/recommendations in posts #3 and 12: early M6 vs late M6.

If anyone tries to give me a black eye, I can bash them senseless with my M5! 🙂
 
ferider said:
[...]Or a CV mini meter [...] Also, maybe you want to consider a Bessa, Hexar RF or ZI with Auto-exposure ?
Click to expand...
That sounds like what I do: either VCII meter or AE. For me, metered manual works least well - adjusting exposure while peering through the viewfinder. I prefer to either trust the AE (with +/- EV) or pre-set exposure without the camera at eye-level. The VCII meter is nice and handy (used mostly for "sanity checking"). I'll use a hand-held incident meter for slower-paced stuff, though.

YMMV, of course.

...Mike
 
I just got an M5 on the dark bay for $550; try that or a CL (even less). An internal meter, especially a spot meter, allows you to develop your own sense of the zone system and how tones are reproduced in photos. I recommend an M5 or a CL. If you add a 1.25 finder magnifier to a M5, it's darn near ideal. In any case, remember that what is bought can be sold, and if you aren't happy you can move on. But know this: In 1968 when I combined M cameras and the zone system, it was a total eye opener and the beginning of B&W photography with a full range of tones.
--Lindsay
 
M5???????? Oh no!

M5???????? Oh no!

Whatever you do don't get that terrible, horrible, no good, very bad, huge, ugly, overweight M5 with the best meter that I have ever used in a camera or in my hand. 😱 😀 😎

My first M5, Bigfoot, spoiled me forever. That's why I had to get Bubba, my second M5.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom