Help me choose a one and only camera and lens system

[Archiver]

Okay, so you want a film Leica with a meter, but you don't want to spend the kind of money that the MP and M-A cost. Your best option for that is the M6 classic or M6 TTL.

If you are willing to look outside of Leica, the Zeiss Ikon ZM is magnificent. About the same price as a good condition M6, much larger and nicer viewfinder, lighter, easier to load, and has a longer rangefinder base which means slightly more accurate focusing. The only caveat is that if the electronics are irreparable, it becomes a paperweight.

Another option is the Hexar RF, which is pretty much like a M7 but built by Konica. The shutter sound is louder, from what I understand.

As for lenses, two, or a maximum of three lenses will do you fine as long as you know what kind of images and subjects you like to shoot. My travel kit is 21, 35 and 50. My everyday two lens kit is 28 and 50, and my one lens kit is a fast 35.

There is a huge range of Leica lenses from over the years if you must have Leica, some being a reasonable price depending on age and quality.

The Voigtlander lenses, particularly the M mount versions, range from great to superb. The 35mm f1.4 Nokton was purportedly intended to emulate an earlier 35mm Summilux. Correspondingly, it is a bit glowy wide open, but sharpens up considerably as you stop down. I use this lens for my fast 35 and it's great. The Zeiss 35mm f1.4 Distagon is a larger and very differently rendering lens, much more contrast, no glow wide open, and sharp as heck even at the widest aperture. I have been playing with the thought of trading in a few lenses and replacing them with the Zeiss ZM 35mm Distagon, but you mileage may vary.

I have a 50mm Summicron and a Zeiss 50mm C Sonnar, and both are excellent for different reasons. The Summicron is very sharp wide open, although the bokeh can be a little more harsh than other lenses. The C Sonnar has a beautiful glow which makes it perfect for people photography, renders gorgeously, and is a bit faster than the Summicron. I haven't tried any Summilux lenses, so I couldn't tell you about them.

Zeiss lenses can be a bit hit and miss because some develop a 'wobble' in the lens ring. My oldest Zeiss lens, a 28mm bought in 2008, has become very dry and scuffy to focus. My 25mm is going in that direction, and my 50mm C Sonnar has a slightly 'loose' focus ring but is still smooth and slick. The much less expensive Voigtlander lenses have never had these issues.

 

[David Hughes]

Here's my 60+ years of experience. The man wants a Leica. Let him buy a Leica.

Exactly, but I think he/she wants to know about blocking the VF and that's hard to answer until we know the model. It looks like some sort of M6, so can the M6 users take it from there?

The other thing I'd ask is does the lens quality matter so much? Few of us produce posters all the time and a lot of us never go over 12 x 8 or that silly 10 x 8 which isn't even full frame. So a middling lens can be excellent.

Regards, David


PS It took me years to realise that the print size is an important factor in judging lens quality. Stick to 4x6 and it doesn't really matter...

 

[raydm6]

M6 Classic + 35 v4 Summicron.

 

[gzisis69]

thanx for the quick an interesting answers. From what i read i consider:
1) leica m6 with 50 summicron
2) zeiss 35 2.8 lens with a camera( wich camera would you suggest ? if the lens is not a leica the body will sure not be leica but must have great viewfinder size functionality reparability and of course price. Also the 2.8 is a litte too dark i think so the lens must be really exceptional)
3) contax t3. a friend suggested that yesterday but i have not seen the camera and its crazy expensive for such small thing. Is the lens comparable to
the zeiss 35 2.8 you suggest ?
4) the olympus small rangefinder sound great but i want a 35 or 50 lens and i dont k ow if there is one with normal lenses( why the hell would someone have a 42 lens ? i dont like the idea at all, sound the worst of both worlds)
5) another combo with 35 or 50 lens and a body that is small and cheaper as a leica and not compromising would probably do.
I have shot the last 10 years with film only. I have a Pentax mx,lx, 3 good lenses and a nikon fm2 with 50 1.4. What i dont like with the nikon is the huge size and weicht and the pentax lenses really are not the quality i need( also have some problems with foccusing sometimes with the pentax idk why. critical focus is a must for me).

 

[FrozenInTime]

Too much decision paralysis in your mind:
Just go for the M6 + 50/2, shoot a few dozen rolls then all will be clear.

 

[kshapero]

Nikon FE with a Voigt 40/2 and Nikkor 105/2.5 Ais lenses.

 

[splitimageview]

The FM2 isn’t huge, by any stretch. Not much larger and maybe even lighter than an M6 body. Get a Nikkor 50/1.8 pancake to drop size and weight from the 1.4 setup...

I’d suggest actually shooting with a rangefinder to see if you enjoy it, before spending a large sum on an M6 and Leica lens.

There are many fixed lens RFs for little money that would enable this.

If you *do* like it, that’s when to start making large purchase decisions....

There are also alternatives like the ZM and Hexar RF that you might consider. Coming from those SLRs, they both have much easier and quicker loading (unlike any Leica M) as well as auto exposure. And the Hexar is much more economical...

(And don’t discount 40mm lenses out of hand! The 40/2 Voigtlander just mentioned is fantastic and has super close focus. There is also a 40/1.2 not to mention the Leica 40/2 which is the best bang for the buck of any Leica lens...)

 

[Archiver]

And don’t discount 40mm lenses out of hand! The 40/2 Voigtlander just mentioned is fantastic and has super close focus. There is also a 40/1.2 not to mention the Leica 40/2 which is the best bang for the buck of any Leica lens...

I had the chance to try out a Minolta 40/2 a while ago, and it was so cool. Tiny lens, great performance. Yeah, kind of bloomy when wide open, but that's part of the character. I found 40mm to be a very versatile focal length.

 

[Out to Lunch]

ill travel for the next 2 years the world so the use will be general. What would you suggest ?

My two cents. Not a 35mm camera. Because the film based infrastructure, especially outside North America and Western Europe, has been largely wiped-out. You'll find it hard and expensive to source, develop and scan film. Cheers,

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Sorry, but it is gearhead long talk in OP. Real user, not collector or status pusher, knows which one and only lens works best. Often it comes not right away, but within sometime after use.
And if money is concern here is no reason to overpay for status lenses and camera which is often overpriced due to higher demand from those who are coming from AE side.

Get any serviced M were 35mm frames are present. It is nothing but myth about difficulty to load m2/3. Get not the status but real user lens, like Nokton 35 1.4 II and Ultron 50 1.5.
Use them for one year and take exposures regularly, not just to showing your status here and where.
To learn exposure use free mobile phone app or Viogtlander mini meter or Seconic Twinmate. Any of those will teach you much more about exposure than TTL in M6.
Within three month of regular use, you might become meterless or measure just once in a while.

 

[David Hughes]

Here's my tu'pence worth:-

M6 and Summicron

Your original choice and I think the one you should go for but be warned that there are a lot of different Summicrons and there's the question of VF blocking that I can't answer. FWIW I like the CZ 50mm and some much older lenses.

Zeiss f/2.8 35mm

If you want a Leica because it's a Leica then stick to Leica lenses. There's an elderly 35mm f/2.8 Leica Summaron that everyone loves, btw. Worth thinking about with the M6 and you might buy the M2 later etc, etc.

Contax T3

Expensive but small and you could take two easily as back up on important trips but it only has one lens and that's 35mm but as that's on the list I doubt if it will worry you. There's a Yashica that makes a good substitute and is a lot cheaper...

42mm Lenses

Years and years ago the ideal was that the lens should have a focal length the same as the diagonal of the negative. FWIW it's a usable specification. FWIW many wonder what the point of the 50mm lenses is/are.

Small Cameras

I have to point out that the M cameras are not what I'd call small or light. Take another as a back up and you'll soon notice the weight... To me a small RF with a decent lens means something like the Konica C35 but it's 38mm and f/2.8 and "P" mode only. Or the Leica CL with it's 40mm Summicron. "CL" as in "compact Leica" made in the early 70's with CW'd metering.

Film

As our friend Out to Lunch says, film is more and more difficult to find and get processed. For extensive travel I'd take digital and a lot of small media cards; currently I use the Panasonic LX5 following the demise of the Leica version of my previous one. And I've film in the Konica C35, FWIW.

Anyway, have fun and don't take it too seriously, it's only a camera.

Regards, David

 

[RObert Budding]

Hi, i finally decided to get into the leica film system after a long time of thinking. Im not a collector, ill use my equipment to photograph and not let it in a box for the next generation. As a camera from what i have read i think the m6 is the best buy for me cause it has a photometer and is easier to load and use as an m3 or an m2 for example. The newer models are extremely expensive and for my use dont justify the price tag. I cant decide which magnification is best for me cause im not so experienced and have only tried two m6 from friends. I wear glasses for nearsightendness all the time if thats important to decide. Or maybe is the lens decision first more important to decide after the camera model ? im leaning towards 35 or 50mm. Im not sure which one though cause i really like both and have used both in the slr world for many years. For me its important the small size
and weicht.I dont want the lens to block the wiefinder. I would surely prefer 1,4 but if that happens with all 1,4 lenses,ill settle with a summicron option. If the summicron quality is the same
as the summilux i will surely not discard the summicron option. Critical focus is realy important and i have read that summicron focus easier but i havent compared both. i wont buy another lens in the future cause one is enough so that must be really good. And now the use, ill travel for the next 2 years the world so the use will be general. What would you suggest ?

To travel where? To take what sorts of photos? What is the risk that your gear might be lost or stolen? How easy is it to repair your camera in the places where you will travel?

 

[Phil_F_NM]

I'm not helping anyone by adding my personal opinion to another's personal choice, but if I were to be on a trip around the globe with one camera and one lens it would be my Nikonos V with 35mm f/2.5. Or maybe my Pentax MX with 50mm f/1.4. Or maybe my Leica M4 with DR Summicron. Or maybe my 4x5 field camera. Or maybe my Yashica D. Or perhaps my Gundlach Korona VI. Maybe my Konica T3 would be best with the 50mm f/1.7 but do I bring the black paint one or the chrome body? Or maybe one of my restored Bell and Howell 70s but do I take the DL or DR? Maybe even the KRM with a 400ft magazine.
Perhaps just get your Pentaxes fixed and freshen up your lens selection with either newly serviced lenses (your own) or new lenses altogether. A Leica lens is not going to be any better than a Takumar or SMC-M or SMC-A, and you can't focus and compose more precisely with a rangefinder than you can with an SLR, if these things matter to you, as you say they do.
See, it's all just gear nonsense. I'd probably just use my phone like everyone else...
I'm certainly not going to tell another person my personal opinion about which Leica to buy or take and which lens to stick on it. If you have the Leica itch, you're going to scratch it. Buy one, use it, figure out if it's right for you.
This is all conjecture of what we all would use and everyone has their own opinion. Many of these threads have come and gone as well, all with the same outcome, as many opinions as there are people who are posting.
Phil Forrest

 

[David Hughes]

Problems focusing the Pentax could be a simple matter of adjusting the mirror, unless both the LX and MX do it. They do a nice 40mm lens for the Pentax which makes it very small and neat.

And two Pentaxes means one to carry as a back-up...

Regards, David

 

[Guth]

I have enjoyed cameras since my childhood and best fit into the class of the "occasional photographer". I was more active with my photography when I was younger. These days I find that sometimes I have the itch, most of the time I don't. I own a M6 TTL and both the 35mm Summicron and 50mm Summicron lenses. I had never owned or operated a rangefinder camera at the time of my M6 purchase. I have no doubt that I romanticized that purchase, yet I have never regretted it. While the 50mm lens does see use, I find that it is the 35mm lens that remains mounted to the camera the vast majority of the time. The lens hood on my 35mm Summicron does extend into the frame, partially obscuring the view within the frameline (the amount of which depends on the focusing distance due to the parallax correction). For me the impact is minimal and it has never bothered me, not once. But your mileage might vary as this is a concern for you.

Here's the thing, I bought my M gear new back in 2000. I doubt that anyone would have thought it a wise purchase. Had I decided that it wasn't for me it surely would have been a bit painful from a financial perspective. As you would be looking at used gear and prices are on the rise, if a M6 and a Summicron lens is what you want I would say go for it. If your budget won't be overstretched by such a purchase this strikes me as an ideal time for such a purchase as prices on used film gear continues to rise. Just make sure that you do so in advance of your travels and spend a few weeks hauling your camera around with you wherever you go. Discover how the experience impacts you good, bad or otherwise. If you find that you do like it then great. If not then sell the camera and lens and move on. At least you know that there is a good market for the gear so unless something breaks down or you somehow damage the camera or lens you are likely only out the time and effort involved on your part.

By the way, I don't think that one needs to be a Leicaphile to enjoy such a purchase even if it is a bit over the top. I for one will never wear out my gear. Like yourself, I did, and do, desire an internal light meter in my camera. If the meter should go out on my M6 TTL then so be it. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it if it happens at all. I also don't get worked up about all of the other M film models. They are no doubt all great cameras and as long as a person is happy with what they are using then more power to them. I remain happy with my M6 and should that ever change I will simply sell my gear and move on, just as life itself does.

 

[Bill Clark]

I like the responses here.

It’s great to read about your philosophy of photography, your equipment and how it has affected the photos you make.

Great job!

Wonderful forum.

 

[michaelwj]

If I had my chance to do it again I would get an M2/4/6/P/A and a 35mm lens. The details are not important. I'd go for one of the following two options, deciding if you want a home or a black camera.
Chrome: M2 with a 35/2.8 Summaron (or a 35/2.8 CZ C-Biogon as a modern option)
Black: M4(-2,-P) or M6 with a 35/1.4 Summilux v2 (or a 35/1.4 CV Nokton as the budget option)

Actually, I just use an X100F now, it's a much easier 35mm compact travel option.

 

[Godfrey]

An M6 in good condition would certainly be a fine body if you prefer having a meter in the camera. The M6 finder is .72x magnification, which works fine for me and my glasses. 28mm frame lines are a bit difficult to see with glasses, but eh? You just frame using what you can see and get to know what the lens sees.

(When it comes to film M bodies, I prefer the often disparaged M4-2. It has no meter, and the first run of them had exactly the same viewfinder characteristics as the M4 which preceded it: only 35/50/90/135 frame lines, simple and uncluttered. A properly serviced M4-2 is usually less expensive than most other M bodies and is every bit as good a camera as any of them. A light meter app on your smartphone will do just as good if not a better job than the in-camera meter of any film M, and it keeps the body simpler and less likely to need repair. But that's just my preference and feeling; I've owned nearly all the different film M bodies over the past 50+ years and this is what I prefer. 🙂

I've carried Ms on many trips, over many years, and often one was my only/main camera. A typical and very handy kit is a body with normal, wide, and short tele lenses. For me, this usually means a 35/50/90 lens kit, although I sometimes have used 28/50/75, and other times have used 21/35/50. I consider either of a 50mm or/and 35mm lens to be an essential for M use .. It's what the camera works best with, in my opinion. My last trip with an M, I carried only 35 and 50 lenses, and used the 50mm lens for all but twelve photographs out of the 300 plus I made.

While it's always nice to have ultra-fast lenses for some shots, by and large with an M you will be fine with an f/2 or f/3.5 lens. The smaller, lighter, slower lenses keep the camera compact and handy, and are much less expensive. There are a lot of choices to be had, don't discount the Voigtländer and Zeiss M lenses as well as Leica's ... Nearly all the lenses made for M-mount are at least very high quality, and they've all got their own specific character.

Keep it simple, don't overthink it. Most film Ms (excepting the M5) are pretty similar in use. The M5 was a brilliant camera with many advancements over the M4, but a bit of an oddball in the line. It didn't sell particularly well and service/support for the M5 is somewhat limited compared to any of the other Ms. I wouldn't suggest one as the best choice for a new M user, but that's my feeling. As much as the M5 is an excellent camera, it never appealed to me because of its size and shape.

Remember that the older bodies will be more likely to need a service before you want to rely upon them. I find it best to buy from a reliable vendor that supplies good service and a warranty unless you are already very familiar with the cameras and can rely upon your own judgement. I can't say enough good about Dan Tamarkin and his crew at http://www.tamarkin.com (Chicago, USA) in this regard: I've been doing business with him for a couple of decades now and he has always been a pleasure to do, offered very sound advice, and offered equipment that proved to be both trouble free and a delight to use.

Good luck with whatever you decide upon.

G

 

[Asim]

I have not posted here for over a year I believe. But after reading your post I feel that I may really be able to give you some insight. I had a Pentax Mz-5n, Then an LX alongside a Pentax MZ-S. I had the 20-35mm f/4 zoom alongside the first three original limited lenses (31, 43, 77). Before these lenses I had the FA50 1.4, the FA 28mm 2.8 and the 40mm pancake lense. I travel a lot and shoot only slide film... I've been shooting with slide film since 2000. Quality slide projection requires that you use only the best lenses and best projector lens and bulb. Now everything I have is Leica. I sold all the Pentax equipment because I just wanted to lessen the volume and simplify the equipment. Here are the things that I came across when deciding on my one body and one lens combo for Leica.

1. I got the Leica MP with a .72... the standard viewfinder. I got it mainly because I knew I would want it even after buying an M6. The red dot really bothers me and I heard the MP has a brighter viewfinder. (I've compared it side by side with the M7 and it is true. The view in the MP are more vibrant and bright). I wear glasses for driving so I added a -2 diopter. Now I can focus and see all the settings inside without wearing my glasses. I just flip my glassses up to my forehead and shoot away.

2. I shot with a Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 for a year and then decided that I wanted to get a 50mm. I knew I wanted the 50 over a 35 for a couple of reasons. First, the ability to get out-of-focus background with a 35mm is limited. Second, it is much easier to compose with a 50mm because you have less clutter in the background to deal with since it has a narrower angle of view. Third, the 50mm works well as a portrait lens, street lens, travel photography lens, landscape lens, etc. And lastly, with a 50mm, I know I'll never want longer but I will want something wider. I tried a 20mm voigtlander but didn't like using the external finder. So lately I've been thinking of a 28mm f/2.8... perhaps even a voigtlander or zeiss.


3. I knew that I wanted the best 50mm quality wise but still something that would pack down small for travel.

4. I opted for the 50mm summilux aspherical for a few reasons. First... this is the king of 50mm lenses (in any 35mm brand) and I knew I would not have to drool over it had I bought any other lens. Second... it has the finger focus tab which I love (there is no tab on the summicron). Third... The lens hood is built in and collapsible. Which means the thing packs down smaller than any other f1.4 50mm lens with a hood. The voigtlander and zeiss lenses with the hoods on are slightly larger. In fact, the summilux asph (with hood collapsed) and the summicron (with hood on since it can't be collapsed) are the same size. And fourth, the creaminess of the summilux asph bokeh is unmatched... and I'm not talking only at f/1.4. Even at f/2.8 or f/4, the lux asph has very creamy bokeh which makes your in-focus subject appear more 3-dimensional and sharper.


5. I sent my MP to youxin ye for a CLA. I even asked him to erase some of the framelines. Now my MP only has one frameline box on each of the three settings... 50mm, 35mm, 28mm. When I shoot, I don't have to bother with any distractions. I just have the one box to frame things in.

6. I had been thinking of getting something wider for the leica. I thought of the Leica 28mm f/2.8 elmarit for the longest time. But in 2011 I ended up getting a Contax T3 for about 400 dollars (I had an Olympus XA bought new for 16years since I was a kid). I made sure I got the 'double-tooth' version of the Contax T3. It came in mint condition from Japan. It has been going strong all these years through bicycle tours and world travels. I sometimes think I should sell it because its worth a lot more and I could replace it with an olympus RC or even a minolta CLE with a Leica 28mm lens (which could also be used on the MP)

There's not much that I would do differently. I have yet to get a 28mm lens... but I'm really happy with the 50mm. When I need something wider, the Contax does the job but that requires me to carry two cameras loaded with film. On long days of walking I have thought to myself that I would much rather be lugging around a lighter 50mm. But then stop at a cafe and remind myself that at least I don't have my old SLR system burdening my shoulders.

I hope this helps. I have gone through a journey. But ever since getting a Leica MP with 50 lux aspherical, I am content. I don't have GAS anymore. There really are only two focal lengths, in my opinion, you need for travel photography... a standard (50mm) and a wide (28mm). And seiously, photography is much more enjoyable with a simplified system... especially for travel and travel photgraphy. The ONLY thing I sometimes wish the MP had is a self-timer for selfies using a tripod.

I should let you know that I've never bought a digital camera and shoot only 35mm slide film and some color and b&w print with my rollei.

 

[Huss]

First Leica for me, M4 with a 50 f2.8 Summicron lens version 3.

I don’t own any Leica cameras with electronics such as an on board light meter or digital.

Sekonic L-158 light meter.

F.Y.I.:

Truth be known, for me, I’m using my iPhone 6s more and more. Our grand daughter, who lives in L.A., was in a school play of Aladdin and I made a nice photo of the entire cast with it.

Sounds to me that the meterless M4 was not a good choice for you and you just dealt with it and a separate meter. You should have used an M7 or Zeiss Ikon or pretty much any camera with AE.