M2 or M6

[sjgslack]

Ok, so I'm going to buy one of the above...

This may seem like a silly question, I know the differences... What I really want to know is this:

For those of you who have had the same dilemma, what did you do, why, and did you regret it?

For example, if you went for the M2- how much do you miss the metering, and more importantly, how often do you get it wrong?

Anyway-- What I really want is thoughts from people who have made the same decision in the past -- there must be quite a few people out there!

Cheers

Silas

 

[begona]

buy M4 🙂 It is in the middle..

 

[sjgslack]

Ha! Good answer 🙂

But it's also as expensive as an M6 (nearly) without the main advantage (the meter)

Cost is an issue, and also I like the look of the M2

 

[kosta_g]

i'd say if you need the light meter, M6, otherwise M2 every day of the week. I love mine, so perhaps i'm biased?

 

[begona]

I had M2 but compared to my M3 it have much lower built quality. So I sold it...also I tried m6 but I not impressed... If you can guess exposure than that meter in m6 is not important. M7 for me is camera close to m3( m3 in my <3) because of AE lock and A mod. But M7 is expensive.

If I am on your place I would choose m6...if nothing else it is newer camera.

edit: built in light meter without AE lock is nonsense to me. You will be much slower in shooting with bulit in meter than without him. 🙂

 

[Richard G]

I had an M2 for years and traded an M4-2 for an M6. The convenience of the meter made my M2 almost unused for quite a long time. The M6 is just a great camera. I can't imagine not needing one if I only had an unmetered M. I truly appreciated the older Ms by comparison only from the fortunate position of having both. Much as I love my M2, I'd say get the M6.

 

[sjgslack]

It's interesting what you say about the build quality -- i didn't realise that.
Unfortunately the M3 is not an option as I want the 35mm frame-lines...

Also the age issue is certainly a good point...

The M7 is less tempting to me- both because of the price and because i like mechanical and don't really have a desire for aperture priority 🙂

 

[sjgslack]

@RichardG - I guess I know that if i had both then the M6 would get most use for that reason.... But part of me wants the limitation of the lack of meter -- Guessing the exposure can make the photography more of a contemplative process

But realistically the M6 is probably going to get more use than an M2 would........

Not an easy one this 🙂

 

[begona]

buy M6 and have L-meter or buy m2 and you will keep 200-400euro for external meter or something

 

[mugent]

I went from an M6 to an M4-2, metered to unmetered, I notice very little difference, unless you are using slide film, it's not that big of a deal if you can estimate exposure in your head, which just takes a bit of experience. Latitude of negative film is huge, you can be many stops off, and it'll still look perfect.

 

[sjgslack]

@begona it's interesting what you say about speed-- When i've shot without a meter I have often been faster...

Still, with an M6 I could always take the batteries out 🙂

 

[sjgslack]

@mugent Yes indeed.... I only shoot B&W film anyway, so correct exposure is indeed less of a concern

 

[begona]

yes 😀 when you do not have L-meter you have one thing less to think about.

 

[sjgslack]

Very true!

 

[dufffader]

I have both M2s and an M6. I use the M2 much more as I prefer the uncluttered display and frame lines of the M2 and the lack of those arrow diodes helps too - they're too distracting to me. I like the idea of guessing the exposure before taking the frame, and usual I carry a Sekonic meter when the light gets tricky.

Personally, I get distracted very easily. Hence the M2.

That seems to suit my style of shooting, but I guess everyone has their own.

The M6 is strictly a slide/colornegative camera for me.

 

[kshapero]

I would much prefer the M2. Not having a built in meter for many years kept me away from the M3/2/4 crowd. Now I would not have it any other way. It gets you thinking about each shot. You decide not the camera. Having an external meter is optional as you would only need it now and then. BTW I use a 40mm lens on my M3 most of the time. I know a lot of guys who use 35mm lenses on their M3, all w/o an EVF. The worst that can happen is you might need to crop now and then. Why not get the best? an M3.

 

[craygc]

I have both; bought the M6 first then the M2. I also had the M2 take up spool modified to the same as the M6. I now can't remember the last time I used the M6; the M2 is that nice. I also use a handheld meter - guessing is a good way to get it wrong!

 

[Roger Hicks]

Not exactly the same, as I have M2 and MP rather than M2 and M6. My wife prefers the uncluttered M2 finder; I'd rather have a meter. THAT'S how personal it is.

Having said that, M6 RF patches flare out easier than M2. Very rarely a problem but when it is, it can be very irritating.

Cheers,

R.

 

[daniel_aj7]

Just like Craig, I have both m6 and m2. Got the m6 first and enjoyed it for quite a while. But eventually got the m2 and enjoyed it even more. I have a VC meter2 on the m2 which works almost the same way as the internal meter in the m6, but you have the advantage of the uncluttered frame lines. I also prefer the look of the m2 and just how it feels in the hand. Last but not least, no flare in the rangefinder patch on the m2.

 

[sjgslack]

This is all really useful info, thanks.

I hadn't realised about the RF flaring on the M6...

I think I may have to go somewhere and hold them both 🙂