fraley
Beware of Claws
Hello,
I posted a while ago that a friend at work loaned me his Leica M6 for a couple of weeks. Here's my impressions. I took it to Fisherman's Wharf on a rainy day and shot three rolls of Kodak Black & White. I can only compare it to the Bessa R2 because that's what I'm most familiar with.
First of all it has a big bright viewfinder, but then so does the R2. I think the focus patch is a little clearer and larger in the M6. But overall not much difference for me. Also the TTL metering system and the display in the viewfinder is pretty much the same.
Some differences - the M6 seems to weigh about twice as much as the R2. I'm not sure if that's a plus or a minus. Also the film loading process is fraught with anxiety if you're like me and you want the reassurance of seeing the sprockets engage the film. With the M6 you kind of drop the film in and it takes care of alignment for you.
The Summicron-M 2/50 lens is a beauty, I'd like to have one for my R2
Seems to have done very well on an overcast day, most of the negatives had in my eyes good contrast. I haven't used this film before so I want to try it with my Bessa R2 and similar weather conditions.
Would I like a Leica? I'd definitely like a Leica lens. The camera body is less of a draw for me. It didn't really add anything to the picture-taking experience for me.
Please check out the pictures in my gallery if you can, I'll be posting a dozen or so. And please, let me know if I overlooked any obvious benefits of the M6. I guess it would hold up better under a beating, but since it was on loan I didn't try any crash tests
I posted a while ago that a friend at work loaned me his Leica M6 for a couple of weeks. Here's my impressions. I took it to Fisherman's Wharf on a rainy day and shot three rolls of Kodak Black & White. I can only compare it to the Bessa R2 because that's what I'm most familiar with.
First of all it has a big bright viewfinder, but then so does the R2. I think the focus patch is a little clearer and larger in the M6. But overall not much difference for me. Also the TTL metering system and the display in the viewfinder is pretty much the same.
Some differences - the M6 seems to weigh about twice as much as the R2. I'm not sure if that's a plus or a minus. Also the film loading process is fraught with anxiety if you're like me and you want the reassurance of seeing the sprockets engage the film. With the M6 you kind of drop the film in and it takes care of alignment for you.
The Summicron-M 2/50 lens is a beauty, I'd like to have one for my R2
Seems to have done very well on an overcast day, most of the negatives had in my eyes good contrast. I haven't used this film before so I want to try it with my Bessa R2 and similar weather conditions. Would I like a Leica? I'd definitely like a Leica lens. The camera body is less of a draw for me. It didn't really add anything to the picture-taking experience for me.
Please check out the pictures in my gallery if you can, I'll be posting a dozen or so. And please, let me know if I overlooked any obvious benefits of the M6. I guess it would hold up better under a beating, but since it was on loan I didn't try any crash tests
g0tr00t
Well-known
Cool, thanks being new to the R2, its a good mini-view.
doubs43
Well-known
Michael, the pictures you've posted in the Gallery are nicely exposed and plenty sharp. Your friend's M6 has done well in your hands.
The additional weight of the M6 COULD make the camera more steady in your hands. Sometimes a camera can be too light. Only you can decide if the extra weight helps or hurts.
Walker
The additional weight of the M6 COULD make the camera more steady in your hands. Sometimes a camera can be too light. Only you can decide if the extra weight helps or hurts.
Walker
T
Todd.Hanz
Guest
A few more benefits of an M6:
Better metering on the M6
Build quality and durability
Brighter RF patch
Quieter shutter
Better ergonomics (for me at least)
Best value Leica camera right now
Besides all the obvious reasons, you'll just look so much cooler with an M6 hanging around your neck
Todd
Better metering on the M6
Build quality and durability
Brighter RF patch
Quieter shutter
Better ergonomics (for me at least)
Best value Leica camera right now
Besides all the obvious reasons, you'll just look so much cooler with an M6 hanging around your neck
Todd
g0tr00t
Well-known
Todd.Hanz said:Besides all the obvious reasons, you'll just look so much cooler with an M6 hanging around your neck
Todd
Thanks Todd! Just when I convinced myself I don't really need a Leica you throw that in there....Ugh
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
Re: Leica on loan - impressions
Or not.
I had an M4-P that sometimes just would not load, especially if the film was cold.
One time I had a newspaper assignment to photograph an opera singer in her dressing room, and I struggled for a full five minutes to get that dratted "rapid-load" spool to grasp the film leader. Finally I gave up; fortunately, I was carrying as a backup camera a Leitz/Minolta CL, with its sensible Minolta-style half-collar takeup spool.
Or not.
I had an M4-P that sometimes just would not load, especially if the film was cold.
One time I had a newspaper assignment to photograph an opera singer in her dressing room, and I struggled for a full five minutes to get that dratted "rapid-load" spool to grasp the film leader. Finally I gave up; fortunately, I was carrying as a backup camera a Leitz/Minolta CL, with its sensible Minolta-style half-collar takeup spool.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
Besides all the obvious reasons, you'll just look so much cooler with an M6 hanging around your neck
I don't know of any reasons to want to look cool -- except for impressing girls.
And trust me: while a girl may be favorably impressed by a $2500 Leica hanging around your neck, she'd be more favorably impressed by a $500 Bessa hanging around your neck and a $2000 necklace hanging around HER neck. ;-P
Last edited:
T
Todd.Hanz
Guest
jlw said:
What other reason is there?
Todd
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
Todd.Hanz said:
Someday I hope to meet a woman who wants to look cool for the purpose of impressing paunchy middle-aged guys with thinning hair! No luck so far...
Thanks for the review Michael. We all know the benefits of the Leica cameras, Todd listed them above. I actually don't look at your statement in regards to the Leica at all. Rather, I see it as a positive statement about the CV cameras.
Now, if the Zeiss Ikon had the same meter as the Leicas it may really be the perfect camera.
Now, if the Zeiss Ikon had the same meter as the Leicas it may really be the perfect camera.
l.mar
Well-known
When I picked up my '59 M3 last year (!), I swore that I would never need or get another camera. So why do I find myself wanting to buy another one (or maybe a nice M2)?
W
wlewisiii
Guest
Someday I'm going to have to try a "real" Leica I suppose. The only one I've ever used is the CL I tested before selling recently. I can hardly say it was a _bad_ camera, but to my hands, a Contax just feels better. Plus the needle is backwards ...
The finder did convince me I need to add a R2C to my collection though - the lines are a nice thing to have and I my uncalibrated eyes need a meter...
Of course if someone wanted to lend me an M2 for an extended period to try to convert me to Leicas I wouldn't object
William
The finder did convince me I need to add a R2C to my collection though - the lines are a nice thing to have and I my uncalibrated eyes need a meter...
Of course if someone wanted to lend me an M2 for an extended period to try to convert me to Leicas I wouldn't object
William
R
RML
Guest
Having a Bessa R, a Leitz Minolta CL and a Leica M2, and using them almost daily and often under extreme circumstances I can safely say a few things about them.
The Bessa R is, compared to the M2, a light weight. It feels different, handles different, and I like its bright patch, the internal light meter and the easy film loading.
The CL is small, almost as compact as a modernday p&s. It loads easily, the light meter is very accurate, the patch is clear, and the fact it hangs on its side is a plus IMO. The standard 40/2 lens is a wonderful beast!
The M2 is heavy, loading is awfully slow, and it lacks an internal meter. The patch is bright. It handles well, but so do the R and the CL.
After using all of them in Mongolia for 5-6 weeks in a row I've come to the conclusion that the CL is for me the best traveling camera: it's small, the lens is fab, and overall the CL is a wonderful and accurate camera.
The Bessa R is my work horse. Having an internal meter is such a wonderful thing you'll miss it when my camera doesn't have one. It's bigger than the CL and that makes me hold a more comfortably when I'm shooting in the streets in deep winter at -20 C. The easy loading is also a big advantage at low temperatures.
The M2 lacks an internal meter, which IMO is a major drawback. However, in its Japanesque Gold cover it looks so nice. It handles nicely too, and its shutter is silent. Nowadays I'm taking this heavy brick wherever I'm going, including a handheld meter.
In the end all three cameras have pros and cons, and none is worse or better than the other. When I go out shooting deliberately I bring all three cameras, each mounted with a diferent lens (the CV 25/4 on the CL, the J-8 50/2 on the Bessa R, and the J-9 85/2 on the M2). I have no real preference over either camera; much depends on the situation and purpose.
The Bessa R is, compared to the M2, a light weight. It feels different, handles different, and I like its bright patch, the internal light meter and the easy film loading.
The CL is small, almost as compact as a modernday p&s. It loads easily, the light meter is very accurate, the patch is clear, and the fact it hangs on its side is a plus IMO. The standard 40/2 lens is a wonderful beast!
The M2 is heavy, loading is awfully slow, and it lacks an internal meter. The patch is bright. It handles well, but so do the R and the CL.
After using all of them in Mongolia for 5-6 weeks in a row I've come to the conclusion that the CL is for me the best traveling camera: it's small, the lens is fab, and overall the CL is a wonderful and accurate camera.
The Bessa R is my work horse. Having an internal meter is such a wonderful thing you'll miss it when my camera doesn't have one. It's bigger than the CL and that makes me hold a more comfortably when I'm shooting in the streets in deep winter at -20 C. The easy loading is also a big advantage at low temperatures.
The M2 lacks an internal meter, which IMO is a major drawback. However, in its Japanesque Gold cover it looks so nice.
It handles nicely too, and its shutter is silent. Nowadays I'm taking this heavy brick wherever I'm going, including a handheld meter.In the end all three cameras have pros and cons, and none is worse or better than the other. When I go out shooting deliberately I bring all three cameras, each mounted with a diferent lens (the CV 25/4 on the CL, the J-8 50/2 on the Bessa R, and the J-9 85/2 on the M2). I have no real preference over either camera; much depends on the situation and purpose.
peter_n
Veteran
I would agree with Remy that a meter is a must on a camera. I have good external meters and I'm OK at estimating sunny 16, but sometimes you just need a meter in the camera. The meter in my M6 is great, I've tested it against the Megatron and my Minolta III F and it is amazingly accurate.
l.mar
Well-known
I must say that I haven't missed having an internal meter on my M3 at all. If anything, "overmetering" (is that a word?) is the antithesis of 35mm rangefinder camera use --- that is, it slows down the inherent speed-design for R/F cameras. I use a number of hand-held reflective/incident meters, and find them as handy (and usually more accurate) than internal light meters. On the other hand, I have had internal meters quit before -- such as when shooting from boats on open water with my Lynx 14e --"Sunny 16" saved my shots then. As for loading the older Leica M-series cameras, I find that the Leitz/Minolta CL (which is another great camera) is actually harder to load than my M3. Like Brian said, extra spools are a great idea (and in fact, I'm in the market for a couple).
Just my humble $00.02.
Wishing you all a Very Happy New Year!
As for loading the older Leica M-series cameras, I find that the Leitz/Minolta CL (which is another great camera) is actually harder to load than my M3. Like Brian said, extra spools are a great idea (and in fact, I'm in the market for a couple).Just my humble $00.02.
Wishing you all a Very Happy New Year!
Last edited:
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
They're an excellent idea, since sooner or later you're bound to drop one!
[sfx] TINK! whirrrrrrr....
[JW] "What was that?"
[notices that film spool has rollled away down the sloping floor of a dark theater and vanished under 2,500 seats...]
I used to carry a couple of spare Leica takeup spools until I put the quick-load kit in the M2. Never had lost one, but it's good to be prepared. I could just imagine how silly I'd feel having dropped the spool into a bottomless pool or something... without a spare, that would put a sudden end to photography!
It's interesting to hear different opinions on the metering issue. A built-in meter is useful, I think especially in conjunction with auto exposure or with strange lenses or attachments on an SLR with TTL metering.
But otherwise I don't at all feel handicapped without an internal meter, as I'll often ignore it in favor of hand-held incident metering and making mental note of variations in lighting.
OTOH, AE is very useful in fast-changing situations. I'd pick a Leica M7 over an MP for that reason (similarly an R2a over an R2), but if choosing between an M4 and M6 the presense of the M6 meter is unimportant...
It's interesting to hear different opinions on the metering issue. A built-in meter is useful, I think especially in conjunction with auto exposure or with strange lenses or attachments on an SLR with TTL metering.
But otherwise I don't at all feel handicapped without an internal meter, as I'll often ignore it in favor of hand-held incident metering and making mental note of variations in lighting.
OTOH, AE is very useful in fast-changing situations. I'd pick a Leica M7 over an MP for that reason (similarly an R2a over an R2), but if choosing between an M4 and M6 the presense of the M6 meter is unimportant...
Hmm... looks like Brian is soon going to pass me on the post count!
taffer
void
I really like AE with aperture priority and used that with my X-370s almost all the time. OTH, I use the meter on the CL and Canonets but don't miss it with my other RFs, as then either the Pilot (Sixtino) 2 or many times just guessing sort of work for me.
Now if they would put the hybrid shutter of the Nikon FM3a into a RF camera, that would be veeeeeery nice.
Now if they would put the hybrid shutter of the Nikon FM3a into a RF camera, that would be veeeeeery nice.
Well today Nikki asked to borrow the Leica M3 to take a picture of a new little friend. She did not seem to be put off by the lack of a meter being built into the camera. Her 3-year old friend was a little disappointed that we could not look at the pictures on-the-spot.
When is Leica going to come out with a camera that uses Polaroid film!!! HUHH!!! Damn if they don't go the digital route first...
When is Leica going to come out with a camera that uses Polaroid film!!! HUHH!!! Damn if they don't go the digital route first...