Go M or stick with R

AnimalBones

Newbie
Local time
4:53 PM
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
6
I shoot an R6, mainly as I love all mechanical with the convenience of built in metering and it is a route into Leica glass. I have never had a rangefinder and have always wanted an M, probably an M6 is an analogue of my R6 but am having trouble over wether to take the plunge so am requesting advice over the tangible advantages of moving to an M6.

Pros

Easier to carry and handle
Probably quicker snapping
Access to interesting glass outside M mount

Cons

The cost of the body and lenses would mean a significant time spent saving to get even close to a buy. Is that worth it? (Like a year to save I reckon)

Although I cannot get interesting non Leica glass in the R6, is the M glass really any better to justify the change? Should I just take the money saved on an M body and invest in better R glass?
 
I’ve used both rather extensively and truthfully, the focusing and framing method was the primary differential. The R6 and a 50 is certainly larger but I wouldn’t say that much slower. I would also say the M isn’t a big leap forward in ergonomics.

Right now M’s are blisteringly expensive. If it was me, I’d keep the R6 kit and should the prices come down in near future, maybe give it a go.

Ultimately it’s comes down to how badly you want to try and M
 
It's a deep, deep rabbit hole you're thinking of diving in. I know, the R series cameras were my gateway to M rangefinders. It's been enjoyable, but expensive. Thing is, I hardly use the R cams anymore. It's mainly because I've been using the rangefinders more than anything else, but also because my excursions have been curtailed due to the virus crisis. I hope that when things get better I'll be back to using the R kit.


PF
 
I shoot both, it's horses for courses to me. Wider than 35 or longer than 90 I mostly use Rs (although I have lots of lenses in between), 50s to 90s I shoot my M3, 35 to 50s I shoot my M5 or M2.

I love the results from both, but much prefer the metering of the Rs, only my M5 having a spot meter. Never got on with the M6 meter so sold the camera, and with its flaring viewfinder which is also inaccurate on the M6, I find the M5 a much better camera.

An M6 is a whole lot of cash, and the Leica R glass equivalents are half to a third of the price. I can afford fast R glass, not a chance for Ms.

Different beasties.
 
Super helpful, thanks! Cost is a major issue so I have suspected that as much as I would like an M, I’ve not seen any evidence that it is a cost effective alternative for my personal finances
 
Two thousands + for camera, which nobody knows how long it will lasts before it needs near three hundreds CLA (at least).

Not worth it, IMO.

Meanwhile, M2 with Color Skopar 35 2.5 is just the same M experience and costs much less.

BTW, I'm finding Nikon EM with small primes to be as good as M for snapping. It is compact as well.
 
I use both Rs and Ms. Ms are much easier to focus with 50mm and wider lenses, for me. Especially with wides. R's are super easy to focus (and pretty much all SLRs) with 50 and longer.

They really are nothing alike. Might as well be comparing my FM2n to my M as I would an R to an M.

But.. I do prefer shooting with an M because the RF experience is more relaxed and open. But if someone said to me that my family's life depended on me getting the shot, and I had to pick between a M or an SLR, well....

What's my point? If you can afford an M, get one.
 
BTW, I'm finding Nikon EM with small primes to be as good as M for snapping. It is compact as well.

I love mine. Takes great photos, cheap, light and great lenses. Or you can have the two arrow exposure meter experience of the M6 for 15% of the cost with the bombproof FM2n. Photos will be just as good and it's easy to repair.
 
I love mine. Takes great photos, cheap, light and great lenses. Or you can have the two arrow exposure meter experience of the M6 for 15% of the cost with the bombproof FM2n. Photos will be just as good and it's easy to repair.

I took the note about FM2n for myself 🙂.

Another non money wasting alternative to R for small camera and tiny lenses would be back to the Leica roots IIIc with compact Viogtlander LTM lenses.
LynnB proves it often in RFF gallery with Color Skopar 20 f4.
Just by looking at his photos I want this kit 🙂.
 
Never owned or shot one, but current prices are not compelling.

As I shoot meterless M3 and M2 I'd choose them at about the same price. Then you'd have an absolutely classic Leica of the great period (metering is easy to master handheld).

Or get an M5 with a brilliant meter, stunning viewfinder, and the most thought out rangefinder of the lot. It's the Leica I use the most (M2, M3, M5, III, Leicaflex SL2, R4s, R7 and R8).
 
I shoot an R6, mainly as I love all mechanical with the convenience of built in metering and it is a route into Leica glass. I have never had a rangefinder and have always wanted an M, probably an M6 is an analogue of my R6 but am having trouble over wether to take the plunge so am requesting advice over the tangible advantages of moving to an M6...

Should I just take the money saved on an M body and invest in better R glass?
I've used both M and R cameras over the years and personally have always gravitated back to the M system. There is no way I would pay ~$2,500 for an M6 when I could get an M2, M4, or M4-2 for roughly half that. If you insist on an M, then go in that direction (a built-in meter is not worth $1,000)!

But I'd say the best move for you would be to a Leicaflex SL or SL2. You'll just need to make sure your lenses have three cams.

... Or get an M5 with a brilliant meter, stunning viewfinder, and the most thought out rangefinder of the lot. ...
+1
 
Get a Hexar RF and a voigtlander 35/50mm lens depending on your preference. You get the rangefinder experience but at a much lower price. Then if you use it a lot and love it then look for an M6 and go lens shopping. Yes they are expensive but I feel like they are only going to go up in price.

I inherited an M3 that was my grandads but if it wasn't inherited I would have sold it and kept my old hexar RF and matched it to a planar or nokton 50mm.
 
If you like the R, stick to it. The M6 seems to be a pretty bad deal nowadays. I had tried the R system and didn‘t like it since I use Contax SLRs. Don‘t open the Pandora‘s box 😉
 
Get a Hexar RF and a voigtlander 35/50mm lens depending on your preference. You get the rangefinder experience but at a much lower price. Then if you use it a lot and love it then look for an M6 and go lens shopping. Yes they are expensive but I feel like they are only going to go up in price.

I inherited an M3 that was my grandads but if it wasn't inherited I would have sold it and kept my old hexar RF and matched it to a planar or nokton 50mm.

Just looked up prices on the RF. I was surprised at how high they were.
 
I've used both M and R cameras over the years and personally have always gravitated back to the M system. There is no way I would pay ~$2,500 for an M6 when I could get an M2, M4, or M4-2 for roughly half that. If you insist on an M, then go in that direction (a built-in meter is not worth $1,000)!

But I'd say the best move for you would be to a Leicaflex SL or SL2. You'll just need to make sure your lenses have three cams.

+1

Yes, true on the price of the meter. I do handheld metering no problem but have gotten lazy and enjoy the convenience of having it built in!
 
I had thought of a Bessa R3a as an alternative. Cheaper body with access to most of the same glass. Is it worth it (or another Bessa)?

No. I had an R3A and pretty much hated it. I was/am lucky enough to have Leica Ms, and after putting a couple of rolls of film through the R3, I realized that I'd never use it given the choice of having Leicas.
The Leica is just so much more pleasant to use, it even feels nicer in hand. Smoother, quieter and the feeling of knowing that, well, it's a Leica.

And this was when I paid $500 for the Bessa! They now are $1000K which is just bonkers. Leica money (M2/M3 etc) for Cosina quality. And I repeat, I had both at the same time.

If you want a Leica M, getting something else will just result in you still wanting a Leica M, but you just wasted money on that something else.
 
No. I had an R3A and pretty much hated it. I was/am lucky enough to have Leica Ms, ...

If you want a Leica M, getting something else will just result in you still wanting a Leica M, but you just wasted money on that something else.
+1
The Bessa cameras (whatever iteration) are in no way worth whet they're selling for now. If you can't afford a Leica M then consider a Leica CL and have it CLD'd. You'd be into it for less than $600. It's a "real" Leica rangefinder made in Japan!
 
Back
Top Bottom