Going Digital to Film - M6 Advice

[Ronald M]

20 min per raw is way too long. Use presets or change defaults in ACR or with NX2, the program reads the camera settings. Also learn to use batch conversions in either. Set the computer up and walk away.

By the time you develope the film, flatten it, scan it, you will spend 20 minutes per image. And V500 will not give the quality image a D60 will provide. In any case, you still need to post process the scanned image. A cheap scanner will not provide the clean file a D60 will make and the procedure anyway is to scan and get a flat non clipped image which you fix later. Scaccers do not readily provide a finished product.

If you still want to proceed, Delta 100 and Tri x are the best scanning monochrome films.
Develope moderately, Moderately. MODERATELY.

I like film and use M`S, but a time saver it is not. I also use Digi Nikon SLRs.

 

[35mmdelux]

If you still want to proceed, Delta 100 and Tri x are the best scanning monochrome films.
Develope moderately, Moderately. MODERATELY.

Ronald, How does Delta 100 stand up against Ilford 125?

THKS.

 

[Bingley]

I've got the V500 scanner. I think it's a fine first scanner to learn w/. I've been most pleased so far w/ scans using Neopan 400, but I'm also still learning the ropes w/ home film development. Ultimately, as my developing technique improves and I settle on particular film/developer combinations I like, I will probably look to upgrade the scanner to a dedicated 35mm scanner like a Coolscan. But for now, the V500 is a good, inexpensive and cost-effective option.

 

[Pablito]

I'm selling my Nikon D60, lenses, and everything else.

I plan on getting a Leica M6 (EX+), along with a Voigtlander f/1.5 Nokton 50mm, and an Epson V500. Note, that I haven't used film extensively, though any time I've shot with my father's Minolta, I have enjoyed the experience.

My reasoning is that while I enjoy photography a lot, I find the shooting experience with the Nikon to be a bit stoic. I want a bit of involvement with my camera.

Also, while I accept that there is often some degree of post-processing work needed on images, I honestly don't enjoy sitting at my computer and working on each raw file for 20 minutes. It takes away from it.

I know that Leicas are known to be ultra-reliable, but my question is more specific. Can I rely on the M6 to last me up to 5 years or so, shooting around 20-30 rolls a month?

I'm a college student, so basically, I'm shelling out my entire savings that I've allocated for camera gear. If the camera malfunctions, there won't be anything left to repair it with.

Thanks.

Cabron,
You are posting to a board of Leica lovers, bear that in mind. It seems to me you are misleading yourself somewhat and to some extent you are being mislead.

Leicas are reliable but nothing is super-reliable. They break just as much as any other professional quality camera. Having no money left for an emergency repair does not sound like a good idea. Every pro carries backup cameras because cameras break. If you are taking a photo class, you don't want to be caught without the funds to repair your broken camera.

You say, "I want a bit of involvement with my camera." I think any manual focus manual exposure camera will give you what you may be looking for. And if you've never focused a rangefinder, then buying a Leica may be a big mistake because you might not like, or you may not be able to get used to focusing a rangefinder. Think about getting a Nikon FM or FM2 and a cheap, fixed lens RF like a Canon, just to try out RF focusing. The fixed lens RF cameras from Canon, Olympus, etc are very good; the Nikon FM will let you get a taste for manual focusing and metering. Buy both those cameras and you're still saving a thousand bucks over your projected spending.

Shooting film, then scanning, is not going to save you any time over processing RAW files and may actually take longer. You have to post-process the scans...

Just to be clear: I own and use professionally Leicas, DSLR's etc etc. But I learned to focus RF cameras at a young age and it comes second nature to me. I've known lots of folks who bought, then sold Leica M cameras because they didn't like the RF focusing.

 

[mmk60]

I have the V500 and Coolscan 5K. I bought the V500 to scan prints and Polaroids. The Coolscan 5K is far superior when it comes to scanning films.

A Ex++ M6 for $1500? You can buy my Ex++++ (Mint-) M6 TTL for less.

 

[bobkatz]

Cabron:
Greetings....this word in spanish (your nick)means a lot of feelings, and makes me laugh...😀😀..
Its no offensive for the other person, indeed means you are perfect, sine quanon, chingon, fregon, etc...
Good luck in your sale Cabron...
Have a nice day...
Bob.

 

[Pablito]

Going from Nikon D60 to Leica is like going from a Toyota to a Mercedes.

And the Toyota is a lot more reliable and less finicky than the Benz.

 

[Frank Petronio]

There is a nice looking M6 Classic in the classfieds for $1100, you can split the $400 savings and just send me only $200 finder's fee.

Seriously you should be able to get a nice M6 and a good 50mm for $1500 total.

 

[Rob-F]

I know that Leicas are known to be ultra-reliable, but my question is more specific. Can I rely on the M6 to last me up to 5 years or so, shooting around 20-30 rolls a month?

I bought my M2 new about 1960. Although it never failed, I began to feel guilty after nearly 40 years, so I sent it in for a CLA. Now I've had it almost 50 years. Last fall I had it checked by a factory technician during the LHSA annual meeting in Louisville. He said it was fine. And it is.

Five years? I've had the first of my 3 M6s since 1997. So that's 12 years now, and it wasn't new then. In fact, it is from the 1980's. It's fine.

In fact, out of 7 Leica Ms I own, the only one that needed work was an M3 I bought used. The shutter speeds were off, so Sherry Krauter overhauled it. It's been fine ever since.

Not to worry.

 

[35mmdelux]

In the film days, pros would shoot 10 rolls a day --70+ rolls a week with Leicas. They dont call it a Mercedes for nothing.

 

[kievman]

If you shot color, processing time is zero as most likely a lab will do it. scanning time depends on the scanner. my epson scans 12 images at a time and depending on the resolution it takes anywhere from a few mins to 15 mins.for all 12 scans, during this time other tasks can be done. Basic post scanning tasks usually only takes a few mins per image if there isnt any or little scratches or dust. So It usually takes me alot less than 20 mins per scan. and I do alot of shooting with both film and digital. I shoot proabably 400 or 500 rolls a year. I enjoy working with film much more than shooting pixels. To me digital has no Soul, but unfortunately sometimes the demands of the job require me to use digital, but thats life. Everything I really care about gets shot with film - Michael

 

[splitimageview]

Don't waste time scanning, have a lab do it, it's much better and faster if you choose a good pro lab. Yes it costs money but I much prefer to print the images than spend hours scanning and removing dust.

 

[Frank Petronio]

Just a thought, but at least part of the reason you get into Leica is because of the quality and optics... so why would you want to settle for mediocre scans after all that?

The fella that said your first priority should be a good scanner (or darkroom), second being the lens, and the third being the body... made a lot of practical sense. You can make stunning images with cheap cameras if you know what you're doing and can make a good scan or a good darkroom print.

Granted, a Leica body in your hand is pretty sweet. But you may want to work up to it, and get a handle on traditional photography in a broader sense -- using fun yet inexpensive cameras -- than to spend your last dollar on a Leica set-up that you won't even be able to pull a decent print from.

 

[splitimageview]

It would take a very large budget to buy a scanner that will beat the pro lab scans - 16 megapixel for 33 cents a frame -- and no messing with dust or scratches.

 

[amateriat]

It would take a very large budget to buy a scanner that will beat the pro lab scans - 16 megapixel for 33 cents a frame -- and no messing with dust or scratches.

When I bought my Minolta DS 5400 (first generation) about five-six years ago, brand-new, it was in the mid-to-upper $800 range. At the time, I thought it a near-screaming bargain. The intervening years haven't changed my mind: it's been used on a regular basis for both my own work and others' (hence paying for itself, eventually).

I'm big on the dedicated film scanner as ideal. However, there are flatbeds that can do a credible job: Epson's V700 series appears to acquit itself well, and the 4990 offers good bang-for-the-buck service. Don't stint too much on the scanner front: if you're hankering to shoot with a Leica and any decent form of M glass, there's no point in tossing too much of that image quality out the window with a truly mediocre scanner.

On the subject of Leica: with reasonable care (and I don't mean "babying" it), the thing will outlive you, most likely. The ideal is to work with the camera a lot, to the point where you're barely aware you're using it, where it all but disappears. I like to think of this as the "invisibility" Leica shooters are really speaking of...not how invisible the camera appears to others, but how the camera disappears in the photographer's hands and mind. (I shoot with a pair of Hexar RFs, but the idea is the same.)

Contrary to what someone else said: if you end up not caring as much for the rangefinder experience as you thought you would, you'll likely be able to resell it for, at least, not much less than what you paid for it.

So, why not give it a go?


- Barrett

 

[LeicaTom]

Yes, you should be able to find a nice M6 classic (Wetzlar or newer Solms) DON`T buy a M6 TTL, make sure you get a non TTL one.

Normal M6 classic has the 0.72 finder, which will work well with shooting 35mm lenses, but if you don`t care for shooting wide angle as I do, you can look for a M6 Classic non TTL with a 0.85 finder ~ perfect for shooting the FAST artsy 50mm lenses out there!!!!!

A good body should cost you $1,100/$1,200 - I know where a nice Boxed 0.85 is for around $1,200 now (also an uncommon camera only 3,000 made) so it`s also a collectors item. ~ write me off the board about it at ~ winkermeister@aol.com ~ if you are interested.

M6`s WEAKEST LINK is it`s rewind knob, built flimsy and not very robust when rewinding quickly, (I`ve had knobs come off in my hand before) have DAG service your camera CLA and also have him add one of his custom made ALL BRASS SL-2 style crank rewind knobs.

Been shooting with a M6 since 1992 and I just love it....and here`s "baby" a 1987 one, is going to DAG very shortly for CLA and exterior modifications.....

*Just another reason to post some "shameless" camera porn!*

Here`s my 87' "Wetzlar" M6 with a 1967 Canon f1.2/50mm aka
"The Japanese Noctilux" with a late 1960`s Yashica 35 hood, instead of the bulky, outlandishly priced original Canon one.....

I personally feel this is one of the finest *artistic* lens combo/suggestion for the M6.

Happy Shooting!

Tom

 

[__hh]

"DON`T buy a M6 TTL, make sure you get a non TTL one"

'Normal M6 classic has the 0.72 finder"

so does the TTL version... what does the classic have that the TTL version does not?

Yes, there are reasons why one prefers one over the other, but the above justifications don't hold.

 

[splitimageview]

When I bought my Minolta DS 5400 (first generation) about five-six years ago, brand-new, it was in the mid-to-upper $800 range. At the time, I thought it a near-screaming bargain. The intervening years haven't changed my mind: it's been used on a regular basis for both my own work and others' (hence paying for itself, eventually).

I'm big on the dedicated film scanner as ideal. However, there are flatbeds that can do a credible job: Epson's V700 series appears to aquit itself well, and the 4990 offers good bang-for-the-buck service. Don't stint too much on the scanner front: if you're hankering to shoot with a Leica and any decent form of M glass, there's no point in tossing too much of that image quality out the window with a truly mediocre scanner.

I'm not against scanners (dedicated film or otherwise) as I myself own a Dimage. But I use it only on slides/negs that already exist; new photos are scanned at the time of development at the lab. It simply is not cost effective for me to spend the time to manually scan a newly shot roll -- even if there were no dust issues.

 

[mfogiel]

There is a lot of confusion about this scanning issue - not doing it at a lab is fundamental if you care about proper editing of the raw image, then even if it only cost 33 cents a frame, our new friend wants to shoot 20x36=720 frames a month, so this is already 240USD a month - at this point it would be wise to get a credit for a Nikon CS 9000 and be done with it, and it is the best scanner around for film up to 6x9, barring the ultra expensive Imacons and pro scanners.
The printed image quality is the result of the whole imaging chain, and each element degrades the quality in proportion to its own efficiency, so a CV lens at f5.6 will only be 3-5% less sharp than the most costly Leica lens, but a cheap flatbed scanner will be 30-40% less sharp than a good film scanner, so the result of using a good lens and a cheap scanner will be more or less like shooting with a holga and scanning on a pro drum scanner. There is obviously some utility with the better flatbeds, like the Epson V750 which I also own, but to be able to say that this scanner is not degrading your image significantly, you first have to make sure it focuses correctly, and then do not enlarge beyond 6 times, so if you can be happy with a a 5x7 inch print, it will be fine.

 

[spkennedy3000]

I would recommend trying out the M6 in a shop, and comparing it to the TTL version - although the TTL costs a little more it has a larger shutter speed dial and more intuitive interaction with the meter display in the viewfinder (to me).

The larger shutter speed dial makes a huge difference in my opinion.