Honus
carpe diem
My IIIc is a sweet little camera. It has convinced me that a rangefinder is my preferred method of photography. My only complaints are 1) viewfinder and rangefinder in separate windows and 2) not usable with M-mount lenses. As a result, I have been considering the possible choices for my next purchase, an M-mount body.
I know that I will have a digital rangefinder in my future, so I want to start building a kit that has both a film and digital bodies that share the same lenses. The digital body will be down the road (waayy down the road). I want the film body to last for the next 20 years, hence my strong lean toward Leica. I would like to keep my total cost under $1,000 US.
I am ruling out an M3 because I want the 35mm framelines, which is my most used lens. I really like the look and feel of an M2, but the M6 has the added advantage of a built in meter and 28mm framelines (at least with the .72 finder). The M6 is more conspicuous, however, with 'LEICA' and the big red dot on the front.
As always, I am looking for passionate opinions from this august community.
I know that I will have a digital rangefinder in my future, so I want to start building a kit that has both a film and digital bodies that share the same lenses. The digital body will be down the road (waayy down the road). I want the film body to last for the next 20 years, hence my strong lean toward Leica. I would like to keep my total cost under $1,000 US.
I am ruling out an M3 because I want the 35mm framelines, which is my most used lens. I really like the look and feel of an M2, but the M6 has the added advantage of a built in meter and 28mm framelines (at least with the .72 finder). The M6 is more conspicuous, however, with 'LEICA' and the big red dot on the front.
As always, I am looking for passionate opinions from this august community.
JoeFriday
Agent Provacateur
I think you'll be hard pressed to find an M6 under $1000, altho it can be done if you look hard enough.. I personally would opt for the M2, since it's considered a classic and will be a usable heirloom someday (if it isn't already).. but the M6 is nice if you need something with a meter
Goodyear
Happy-snap ninja
Funny, this is a question I'm (pie in the sky-type) pondering also.
Hektor
Leicapile
The answer is an M2 with a rapid load kit,
if you can afford more then an M4p
If you're shooting B/W you can get by without a meter, - look at fred parkers guide to exposure, and learn kodak's sunny-16 real good (on their site and in their film notes)
only buy an M6 if you just go to pieces without a meter. - but m6 is probably the easiest to resell.
What's wrong with a hand held meter to check that you estimated correctly anyway ?
edit:spelling
if you can afford more then an M4p
If you're shooting B/W you can get by without a meter, - look at fred parkers guide to exposure, and learn kodak's sunny-16 real good (on their site and in their film notes)
only buy an M6 if you just go to pieces without a meter. - but m6 is probably the easiest to resell.
What's wrong with a hand held meter to check that you estimated correctly anyway ?
edit:spelling
LazyHammock
Well-known
I'd vote for an M4-P. I've been using mine for a few months now, it handles very nicely. I'm not missing the built in meter, I use a Sekonic L308B or my eyes for metering and have been very successful in getting negatives I can print. it has more framelines should you want to extend you lens arsenal at a later date - almost everybody does!
Nick
Nick
markinlondon
Elmar user
M6 as the only M body always makes sense, 6 frames and a meter. OTOH, M2's are lovely. As a four-eyed rangefinder user, though my 28 frame is redundant and I find the 135 frame a bit small for serious use. This could be why I don't use 28's or 135's
Mark
Mark
I have both an M3 and M6. I love using my M3, if I could only have one, this would be it for me. But, I use the M6 more often becuase having the meter helps speed up my shooting. That is just my shooting style. (but I would change it for the M3 if necessary)
If I were you I would decide first how important is that meter. If not, then go with an M2, or M4-p which I personally think is a bargain camera. It sounds too like you have handled an M2 and like it, so perhaps you really don't need to look any further at all.
If I were you I would decide first how important is that meter. If not, then go with an M2, or M4-p which I personally think is a bargain camera. It sounds too like you have handled an M2 and like it, so perhaps you really don't need to look any further at all.
saxshooter
Well-known
If you don't care about how it looks why don't you contact Sherry Krauter at Golden Touch and see if she has a "user" M6 for $1000 or under that she has already gone over? Maybe she has a user M2 also. I'd opt for the M6 myself, hot shoe if you'd want to pop a flash on it. A frame counter you don't have to reset. No film spool (on the standard models).
Goodyear
Happy-snap ninja
What makes me wonder is: I shoot 75, but I like the look of the M2!
N
Nick R.
Guest
LazyHammock said:
The Nicks are in agreement. I love my M4-P.
jja
Well-known
Tough call for me. I have just migrated from an M2 to an M6 (by sheer accident).
I think it's harder to find a good user M2 than you might think, and then there's the possibility that it will need a CLA in the not too distant future. If you budget $650 for a good user M2 and add $200-$250 for a competent CLA, you are right at $900. Nice M2s, from reputable dealers, go for $1000-$1200. I don't think you can find an M6 that does not need a CLA for under $1000. Budget $1100-$1200, then be patient.
In terms of use: I loved my M2, for psychological and practical reasons. Psychologically, it just felt right in the hands, it felt substantial, and it was just a nice looking piece of gear. Practically, I came to appreciate the lack of a meter because I found I could meter a scene from a couple of different angles, then simply concentrate on composition. My awareness of lighting conditions was really hightened, which is an experience I never had with a metered camera. I think the meter issue really varies, some people hate not having an in-camera meter.
The M6 is fairly new to me, I've only had it a few days and it may grow on me yet, but it simply does not have the same tactility as the M2. It also feels lighter and not as solid. These perceptions may be simply psychological, but keep in mind that they are in fact made of different materials. In use the meter is very convenient, of course.
I do think that if you shoot mostly 35mm, the M2 will suit you just fine. I have read that the framelines on the M6 are less accurate, that the M6 35mm framelines are closer to 40mm, so I don't know what that means if you are a 28mm shooter.
Which to choose? Why not let the camera choose you? Wait for a good deal on which ever comes along first. Remember, whichever you choose, you are only going to want the other!
I think it's harder to find a good user M2 than you might think, and then there's the possibility that it will need a CLA in the not too distant future. If you budget $650 for a good user M2 and add $200-$250 for a competent CLA, you are right at $900. Nice M2s, from reputable dealers, go for $1000-$1200. I don't think you can find an M6 that does not need a CLA for under $1000. Budget $1100-$1200, then be patient.
In terms of use: I loved my M2, for psychological and practical reasons. Psychologically, it just felt right in the hands, it felt substantial, and it was just a nice looking piece of gear. Practically, I came to appreciate the lack of a meter because I found I could meter a scene from a couple of different angles, then simply concentrate on composition. My awareness of lighting conditions was really hightened, which is an experience I never had with a metered camera. I think the meter issue really varies, some people hate not having an in-camera meter.
The M6 is fairly new to me, I've only had it a few days and it may grow on me yet, but it simply does not have the same tactility as the M2. It also feels lighter and not as solid. These perceptions may be simply psychological, but keep in mind that they are in fact made of different materials. In use the meter is very convenient, of course.
I do think that if you shoot mostly 35mm, the M2 will suit you just fine. I have read that the framelines on the M6 are less accurate, that the M6 35mm framelines are closer to 40mm, so I don't know what that means if you are a 28mm shooter.
Which to choose? Why not let the camera choose you? Wait for a good deal on which ever comes along first. Remember, whichever you choose, you are only going to want the other!
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
I really like my M3, but I don't use it enough because I'm spoiled by the M6 meter (it's actually an M6TTL). Hence, I'd recommend the M6 over the M2. Reason? Ease to shoot.
However, since you seem to be an experienced LTM user, maybe the M2 isn't too far off the mark for you. Besides... you have a more versatile camera at least in terms of framelines.
However, since you seem to be an experienced LTM user, maybe the M2 isn't too far off the mark for you. Besides... you have a more versatile camera at least in terms of framelines.
ywenz
Veteran
As a designated user camera, why would anyone not put the M with the meter ahead of the one that doesn't!?
FrankS
Registered User
I'll go allong with jja: let the camera pick you!
Opportunity is my guide.
Opportunity is my guide.
richard_l
Well-known
The M2 viewfinder is much nicer than that of the M6, being less cluttered and less prone to flare. (Although flare on the M6 is an issue that is blown way out of proportion by Leica detractors and those who are too lazy to use one of the various techniques to eliminate it.) Also, it is far easier and more efficient to use a handheld meter (like the popular Sekonic L308B) than to be constantly worrying about those annoying red lights which constitute additional distracting clutter in the viewfinder.
If you hate carrying along a meter, get the M6. If you don't mind carrying a meter and just want the sheer joy of using a fine rangefinder camera with a viewfinder to die for, get the M2.
If you hate carrying along a meter, get the M6. If you don't mind carrying a meter and just want the sheer joy of using a fine rangefinder camera with a viewfinder to die for, get the M2.
JoeFriday
Agent Provacateur
it's not so much a matter of the meter.. if the two cameras were otherwise identical, I'm sure it would be a no-brainer for most people to choose the metered version.. but there is a noticeable difference in the design and build quality between the M2 and M6.. not to say the M6 is a bad camera.. but the M2 just has that "old world quality" feel to it.. with the M2, you never have to worry about batteries dying on you when you're not prepared, or electronics failing.. the M2 is strictly mechanical, and very precise with what it doesywenz said:
plus, the M2 has a cleaner viewfinder with more usable frames
and finally, some people just don't want to have a metered camera since meters can be fooled
ironically, I thought the same exact thing about 4 months ago.. I didn't understand why anyone would choose the M3 over a 'newer, thus better' M6.. and now I own the M3, myself
ywenz
Veteran
M6 is entirely mechanical save for the meter.
Fred
Feline Great
Try em both if you can. The M6 has the meter and is less likely to need a CLA but a really good M2 would muddy he choice a lot. Using your eyes for metering as you already probably have been with the IIIc you'll get on just fine with the M2.
At risk of putting the feline in the aviary, a used M7 might not be much more than a late M6 TTL, it needs batteries to run (apart from 60 & 125th) but not a problem that I've found, the batteries are small and last for ages. There are some good used ones as well from those bailing out from the halide fields the land of the pixel..... just a thought.
At risk of putting the feline in the aviary, a used M7 might not be much more than a late M6 TTL, it needs batteries to run (apart from 60 & 125th) but not a problem that I've found, the batteries are small and last for ages. There are some good used ones as well from those bailing out from the halide fields the land of the pixel..... just a thought.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I think you should go for the M2. A leap from a IIIc to an M6 may be a bit much of a change, it all depends on how well you can adapt to change. If your main complaint with the IIIc is the viewfinder, and not the lack of lightmeter, then the M2 is a sound financial choice between the M2 and M6. And if film loading with the IIIc isn't an issue for you, the M2 won't be either.
If you really think you will need the lightmeter, go for the M6. But get the M6 "classic", not "TTL".
If you really think you will need the lightmeter, go for the M6. But get the M6 "classic", not "TTL".
thpook
Squawkbox Delux
Ah... the delight of choosing. Really, you're asking "Which fine wine will I have with my gourmet meal?"
The build quality of the M2 is tops, but you're going to want a quickload. The nice thing about the M2 is it's much easier to adjust the RF yourself if it goes out of alignment. The rangefinder is beautiful and bright, but there isn't all that much eye relief for us poor 4 eyes.
The build quality of the M6 is equally as good as the M2, but there is a different tactile feel. With the M2, the film advance is so smooth that I generally check that I have advenced before I shoot, because I almost always forget that I have advanced it. The M6 isn't as smooth, but the difference is so small that it is almost impossible to tell. The meter is accurate, but I generally use my handheld meter, becuase sometimes I shoot with both at the same time (90 on the M2, 35 or 40 on the M6). I meter, then set shutter and aperture on both. The M6 is MUCH quicker and easier to load. If I'm shooting with one camera, it's the M6, every time. I like the M6's viewfinder a bit better. I get whiteout more often than on the M2, but there is more eye relief and I can see the 35mm framelines.
The best compromise between the M2 and the M6 is the excellent M4. It has the same tactile feel as the M2, a nice viewfinder (the same as the M2, just with 135mm framelines). It has the excellent loading, excellent rewind, and I personally like the M6 style advence lever better. If you like the M6's feel better, the M4P is the exact same camera, just with no meter.
Sometimes you can find a good deal on M5s, because they are still not as popular as they should be. You might want to check one out. Just saying.
No matter which one you buy, it's a going to be a good camera. Don't overthink it. Go for the one you want, because everyone has their own opinion on which leica is the best. Like someone said, let the camera find you.
Edit: I forgot, the meter arrows don't light up if the lens cap is on on the M6. I generally use those little arrows as a "lens cap is off" indicator.
The build quality of the M2 is tops, but you're going to want a quickload. The nice thing about the M2 is it's much easier to adjust the RF yourself if it goes out of alignment. The rangefinder is beautiful and bright, but there isn't all that much eye relief for us poor 4 eyes.
The build quality of the M6 is equally as good as the M2, but there is a different tactile feel. With the M2, the film advance is so smooth that I generally check that I have advenced before I shoot, because I almost always forget that I have advanced it. The M6 isn't as smooth, but the difference is so small that it is almost impossible to tell. The meter is accurate, but I generally use my handheld meter, becuase sometimes I shoot with both at the same time (90 on the M2, 35 or 40 on the M6). I meter, then set shutter and aperture on both. The M6 is MUCH quicker and easier to load. If I'm shooting with one camera, it's the M6, every time. I like the M6's viewfinder a bit better. I get whiteout more often than on the M2, but there is more eye relief and I can see the 35mm framelines.
The best compromise between the M2 and the M6 is the excellent M4. It has the same tactile feel as the M2, a nice viewfinder (the same as the M2, just with 135mm framelines). It has the excellent loading, excellent rewind, and I personally like the M6 style advence lever better. If you like the M6's feel better, the M4P is the exact same camera, just with no meter.
Sometimes you can find a good deal on M5s, because they are still not as popular as they should be. You might want to check one out. Just saying.
No matter which one you buy, it's a going to be a good camera. Don't overthink it. Go for the one you want, because everyone has their own opinion on which leica is the best. Like someone said, let the camera find you.
Edit: I forgot, the meter arrows don't light up if the lens cap is on on the M6. I generally use those little arrows as a "lens cap is off" indicator.
Last edited: