First RF / first Leica: MP or M7?

You've gotten plenty of opinions, so by now you're probably thinking of just sticking with an SLR.

FWIW, I grabbed an M7 as my first rangefinder last December. Several reasons, which may or may not have bearing on your case.

1. The M7 is the state of the art for rangefinders. I hardly call aperture priority ae excessive "automation". It's a perfect feature for these cameras and can be easily turned off if you choose to shoot completely manually.

2. I generally don't buy anything used. I expected to use this camera for the rest of my life and particularly wanted to start fresh from frame zero.

3. The M7 offers everything worthwhile that any M has ever offered and, as I noted earlier, represents all of Leica's accumulated engineering refinements.

4. Starting from a lesser camera basically makes your eventual migration to a Leica M more expensive. Additionally, depending on what "lesser" camera you select, you may become discouraged due to poor results.

5. Starting with an new MP or M7 will likely enable you to recover a good portion of your expense if you decide to abandon rangefinder photography.

So my philosophy is to start the with best camera you can afford. Look, buying a rangefinder film camera today is an act of passion rather than reason. Starting with the best will enable you to "put down the damn camera", so to speak, and concentrate on photography rather than the camera that you don't yet have.

Have fun.
 
All RF roads seem to lead to Leica but I would second the advice to pick up a cheap RF first, preferably with AE so you can compare both modes.

I love the MP but if I wanted automation, I'd probably look for a Hexar RF Limited instead of the M7.
 
Thank you all.

Thank you all.

Thank you all for your replies. As I see, the "general opinion" is pretty much ambivalent as my own is. As Ken Tanaka posted, for me converting to a RF-camera has something to do with passion. If I wanted automatisms, that make a photographer's life "easier and lazier", I perhaps should stay with my SLR. But I want something, that (to cite Leica) is a tool and let me do everything manually (though I quite like, that the MP has an exposure metering)... so my first thought was "Get the MP". My only concern is, that when I choose the MP over the M7, I will perhaps miss something, that automatically leads into worse results. I am not concerned about "making it easy", 'cause I don't care, if the M7 lets me shoot quicker due to its aperture priority. I prefer to do it myself and I would love the feeling, that there is nothing about a shot, that made the camera itself. I only want to be sure, that the MP (even if slower) allows results, that are equal to the results of the M7. Someone told me, that the fact, that the MP does not offer the aperture priority/ae lock, automatically leads to frames, that look worse than the ones a M7 takes. This - he said - comes from the missing contrast-checking with the MP. As the MP only shows one stop over- or underexposure of the focused frame-part, the M7 (and only the M7) allows general exposure-metering, so that (only) the M7 allows to adjust the exposure properly. Is this true? Why could it be so?

Thanks again,
Thorsten
 
I use mostly older gear, where a built-in selenium cell meter is considered high-tech. Recently I shot a roll through an original M6 "Wetzlar" with its TTL meter to check it out for a friend. Put the 90mm F2.8 Tele-Elmarit, stepped outside to newly fallen snow and was greeted by a herd of deer. Simply aimed the camera up to the tree line to get the snow out of the field of view, set the exposure, and ignored the meter as I was shooting the deer running over the snow. Everything came out fine. (Gotta scan!) With an aperture priority camera, I would have either gone to manual or had to hold the exposure lock down. With a little bit of experience with EITHER of these fine cameras, I doubt you will miss much of anything. So if you want all-mechanical, get the MP. If you do not mind the electronic exposure system of the M7, it will do everything that an MP will do except work without a battery. Everyone should have such rough choices!

Canon 7, Nikkor 5cm f1.4, exposure via 44 year old built-in selenium meter:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/426/sort/1/cat/500/page/3

Canon 7, Canon 50mm F0.95 lens, wide-open at 1/15th, not enough light to read a meter.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/3272/size/big/sort/1/cat/544

Leica M3, Summarit 5cm f1.5, 50 yr-old Handheld Weston Master II meter.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/427/size/big/sort/1/cat/510
 
Last edited:
shrink said:
As the MP only shows one stop over- or underexposure of the focused frame-part, the M7 (and only the M7) allows general exposure-metering, so that (only) the M7 allows to adjust the exposure properly. Is this true? Why could it be so?
Click to expand...

The M7 has a 'stepless' shutter speed when set to AE mode, meaning it will be able to shoot at, say 1/80 intstead of 1/60 or 1/125. But on any rangefinder the aperture is basically stepless so I guess it doesn't matter.

As my first rangefinder, I originally tried a M7 for the first 10 days, then went and stayed with an MP. For some reason I just liked it - maybe it was the cool rewind knob! I wish I had both!

You may want the try the Bessa R2A or R3A as a first rangefinder or budget M7. If I knew about these cameras, I probably would have bought one of them instead of the MP as my introduction to rangefinders. The Bessas seem like great cameras and at under $600 new they won't break the bank. An older Leica would be another way to go, but it may need to be serviced (CLA'd) by a reputable technician to make sure that everthing is working as it should be.

Way
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thorsten, I get the impression you're fussing a bit too much over your choices... and attributing too much power to a relatively simple camera. A Leica rangefinder (or any rangefinder camera, for that matter) won't think or improve your photography; you do that.

Pay close attention to Brian's post; he did what John Shaw recommends (and most people can do when they have enough experience): estimate the exposure over trusting the camera meter. I've done the same experiment a number of times: I switch lenses when shooting the same scene... and getting different readings from the camera for each lens. Does this make any sense to you?

By the way... whenever I've done this "experiment", I've chosen to go for the reading done with a wider lens. According to the camera meter (fitted with a long lens), I'm overexposing, but the slides always turn out OK.

Well... it just means the meter is getting fooled, because the reflected light is the same.

In any event... if you're to choose one Leica body over the other, go for the MP because of a simple reason: batteries. Should you have the misfortune of running out of juice with the M7, you'll be able to operate the camera on two shutterspeeds only, 1/60 and 1/125, because the rest are electronically operated and controlled. In the MP, the battery feeds the meter only, so you can use that camera at all times, with or without battery, in full capacity and with all shutterspeeds in working condition.

Another Leica you may consider is the M6TTL. It's like the M6 and the MP, only with TTL-flash circuitry, for those rare ocassions in which you may want to use a fill flish with the camera.

Whatever your choice, whether you go for the M7 or the MP, or choose to try out an inexpensive camera before jumping to the Leica train, have fun experimenting and welcome to the forum! :)

Oops, before I forget... see the image below for a sample of what you can do with a fill flash and a Leica M6TTL.
 
shrink said:
Hello everyone,

since this is my first post, let me say "Hello".

I only have a very few years experience with photography and only used SLR-systems so far. I started very basic and went some steps to the more creative photography over the time. As I have to admit, I have only few experiences with film, mainly used digital cameras so far. I now had to see, that the quality of film is better than digital quality (at least, when you want to get frames, that don't seem to be "sterile"). As I like the opportunities of RF-cameras, I now want to make the step into the film-world and this time (so many SLRs later) I want to do it right and buy something I am happy with for years/decades. !
Click to expand...

Thorsten,
For a photographer coming from SLR and digital RF shooting mostly is a culture shock, which often causes doubts about having made the right decision. That's my experience.
So I consider the advice of those friends to be the best who said try it out with a used one or with another make before you spent THAT much money. To sell a M7 MP after a year or so WILL cause loss, believe me, more than selling a used one anyway !

So best you start with a used body (Leica M3,M6, Voigtlaender Bessa R, R2) or a new Bessa R2A and a 35mm lens, best a cron and try out if RF is inspiring for you or a PIA. And keep the big money for two years or 200 rolls before you decide what you want to spend it for.
AE or not for you is not the decisive thing NOW. ;)

Best regards,
Bertram
 
SolaresLarrave said:
I've done the same experiment a number of times: I switch lenses when shooting the same scene... and getting different readings from the camera for each lens. Does this make any sense to you?
.
Click to expand...
Tho I am not Thorsten I'd like to anwer you "Yes" anyway. :) I understand changing the lens as changing the focal length and if you do so of course the meter shows different values, more or less depending on what kind of metering system the TTL metering is based on. Changing from 50mm to 25 mm you can get easiliy 30% more sky or more water in the foregrund and this changes the values of course !

What does not concern the fact that the TTl systems often are cheated because they are set on 18% grey. So my advice would be to meter with the camera on your palm, which comes quite near to 18% grey or hold a lightmeter over your head for incident metering, looking in he direction where the object is situated .

Guestimating light needs a LOT of experience, much more than I have ! I could not trust in my guess at all. :confused:

Best,
Bertram
 
Get a used M6.

These can be had cheaper than an MP, they work when the battery dies, they are still mechanical marvels, and the rewind crank is a lot nicer than the MP.
 
I've not been able to "get into" Leica photography in the past. Every body/lens I bought had trouble. Every one.
The IIIg? Pinholes in the shutter. Nice lens, though.
The M3? Bought in "good condition" from MPEX (Stu, oh, Stu, how could you!), and of course the shutter capped at 1/1000...
The M6TTL? HOW could the let it out of the factory with a rangefinder patch that whited out with ANY outside pictures for the sky image hitting the rangefinder image at the correct angle, and that finish that wore off to the zinc IN the protective case? AND, what's up with that 35mm Summicron ASPH? Isn't it supposed to be sharp? Mine sure wasn't!

But they are best, eh?

So... To heck with it. I wanted to try it. I wanted to "get it." I needed to.

So I figured I'd try again. There's a heck of a warranty on the camera and lenses. I'd get lenses I didn't have in any other formats (both ASPH, one 35mm 'lux, one 90mm Chron) and give it a go.

I'm glad I did. No troubles yet, nice pictures, and I'm having fun.

I couldn't have done it buying used. My luck with those cameras is simply too tragic.

Get either. I'm glad I got the MP. You might prefer the automation from the 7, but the MP is enough for me. Meter? Yes? Good. Film latitude? Provided courtesy of Diafine, thank you very much! Finder that WORKS under the conditions I use it (daylight, too!)? Yes. No capping of the shutter? None that I notice, but I do have some suspicions on SOME of my negatives (jury is still out) where one edge is darker than the other. I'm going to have to look.

There are still some things I'd like for it, that'll wait until next year. I don't have a 50mm or 21mm for it yet. I'll get 'em both eventually, or a J-8 and M mount... Or better, the Contax mount (I WANT THAT ONE NOW!)

I LOVE the idea of someone making something from 50 years ago that performed so well when it came out that there was so little room for improvement.
I almost ordered an SP, another one I wanted. Ah, well.

:)
 
SolaresLarrave said:
Thorsten, I get the impression you're fussing a bit too much over your choices... and attributing too much power to a relatively simple camera. A Leica rangefinder (or any rangefinder camera, for that matter) won't think or improve your photography; you do that.

Pay close attention to Brian's post; he did what John Shaw recommends (and most people can do when they have enough experience): estimate the exposure over trusting the camera meter. I've done the same experiment a number of times: I switch lenses when shooting the same scene... and getting different readings from the camera for each lens. Does this make any sense to you?

By the way... whenever I've done this "experiment", I've chosen to go for the reading done with a wider lens. According to the camera meter (fitted with a long lens), I'm overexposing, but the slides always turn out OK.

Well... it just means the meter is getting fooled, because the reflected light is the same.



In any event... if you're to choose one Leica body over the other, go for the MP because of a simple reason: batteries. Should you have the misfortune of running out of juice with the M7, you'll be able to operate the camera on two shutterspeeds only, 1/60 and 1/125, because the rest are electronically operated and controlled. In the MP, the battery feeds the meter only, so you can use that camera at all times, with or without battery, in full capacity and with all shutterspeeds in working condition.

Another Leica you may consider is the M6TTL. It's like the M6 and the MP, only with TTL-flash circuitry, for those rare ocassions in which you may want to use a fill flish with the camera.

Whatever your choice, whether you go for the M7 or the MP, or choose to try out an inexpensive camera before jumping to the Leica train, have fun experimenting and welcome to the forum! :)

Oops, before I forget... see the image below for a sample of what you can do with a fill flash and a Leica M6TTL.
Click to expand...



Hello:

Welcome to the forum. I am new as well, and having purused and been part of many rangefinder forums, this is undoubtedly the best. Well mannered, intelligent, etc. I am happy.



To ring on this bell, I agree wholeheartedly with Solares above. It should be truly felt what point he (and others) are making. There are unfortunately a lot of superficial people who own Leicas, don;t be one of them, and don;t confuse what I am saying below with this superficiality.


As for your choice. Parents try and give advice from experience and most times children (we) must learn from their own experience. This is a very subjective question.

I am the type that studies, researches etc. to find the best and grow with it for a lifetime, but it still does not compare with experience of having the ability to try and experiment as what you will read many times, in reality you will not at all agreee with. I have had this happen many a time.

You may certainly buy a Bessa for example, and that is great, it may be you. However, the Leica has a feel like no other. It really is the best....and rightly so. Then again, people love the Bessa.

Sometimes I think it better for most new Leica owners to try another camera first or SELL their Leica and get another. the FEELINGS the Leica solicits can be strong, and fondle factor so great that it WILL TRULY HINDER THE SERIOUS STUDENT OF PHOTOGRAPHY. It really will. DO not fall so in Love with your equipment!


Buit the feel and the quality is far above others and it is a camera for a lifetime, and camera to learn with and from.

People may criticize, but it is much how the camera makes you feel. Perhaps some may dismiss me as a romantic, but it makes all the difference in your work.

People compare the camera to a tool. I strongly disagree. It is an instrument, and should be chosen as one studying violin or guitar chooses their instrument. Do you see the complete , yet subtle, difference in frame of mind here?


It is how you approach your work that makes a strong influence, and if you are serious about the artform, then you should find what works for YOU.


The MP is a camera for a lifetime. It represents all I could ever want, and is my sole and only camera. It is a bit heavy though, but built like a brick house and will take all I can offer. Battereis are such a boon. I realize the M7 doesnt use a gereat deal of juice, but I am very anti batteries. I truly love it when my photog. student friend's batteries are dead whilw shooting...


The MP is the instrument of choice. Should you have the means while the digital war is raging and before things settle down , and to each their own in their respective corners....get a deal and get an MP.

This may also sound foolish to the experienced, but for this fellow getting past the LOVE factor of the equipment the black paint truly helps. It should be and is meant to be scratched and come off. You use it more from the beginning without a care. Dont look at your purchase as an investment for heaven's sake. There are far too many superficial people who buy Leica for the wrong reasons.

People also suggest the earlier cameras such as the M2, 3, however, it is like buying a Porsche. You really want to buy the latest model you can afford. For convenience, practicality, etc. These older cameras will most likely need a CLA and you are relying on a great deal of chance and "grey areas" purchasing online one of the older models.



All in all, maoney being an issue, you cannot go wrong with the M6.

But man, I don't care what anyone says, the instrument of choice is an MP. It's a beauty in all respects.


My 2 cents.


Best
Demian.
 
Last edited:
While you can afford MP or M7, why won't you start with a used M6 and a Summicron 2/35 Pre-ASPH, try shooting with this combo for your first experience of Leica RF feel. You'll love the Leica's quality, then make your own decission to sell off M6 and get MP or M7, keep that amazing 35 'cron and purchase more lens if needed. Mine, I'll strictly keep M6 with 35 'cron, forget about MP or M7, save that money to get more lens.

Welcome to the RFF,
Pop
 
You could buy a Bessa R and its superb Color Skopar 35/2.5 lens from CameraQuest for about $425 plus shipping. It's a very good RF, looks a lot like a Leica, gives you a good introductory rangefinder experience without having to get a second mortgage, and it's got a very good metering system. Plus, it'll take M39 Leica lenses.

Spend six months with it and then move up to a Leica. By then you'll have somewhat of a stanard of comparison, which will allow you to appreciate the Leica's silky smoothness and virtually silent shutter release sound.

Ted
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom