M5 experiences?

M

merciful

Guest
Alwyas the non-conformist, I've started thinking about an M5. Anyone here have any comments? Ol' Putsie says that "Its drawback is a restricted range of lenses that can be used, due to the exposure metering swinging arm in front of the film gate." I'd really dislike finding out that my collection of Canon and Nikkor screwmount lenses didn't fit if I blew for one.
 
Silly me: of course I should have checked Steven's site first. Some super-wides and collapsibles are the only potential issues.
 
Bigger than other M's, shutter speeds seen in finder, accurate meter (though just like the CL it's on a swing arm I think), fit's nicely in the hand, all the ones I've seen are in black chrome and the M5's seem to wear through faster, looks lika tank but feels a bit thinner than other M's.
I'd buy an M6 for the same money, unless you can find one for a bargain. It seems the prices have gone up for this camera recently, probably collector geeks!

Todd
 
I'd buy an M6 for the same money, unless you can find one for a bargain.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'm not running into any M6 bodies for the prices I see for user M5s, but I'm still looking.
 
You've been lucky if you've seen M5s priced lower than M6s!

At this point, I've read that the meter in the M5 is a bit old... and only Sherry Krauter, of world fame, will deal with these bodies. You may be better off aiming for an M6 or any M6TTL, with fresher electronic components, easier to fix and with a bit more shelf life ahead.

Now... if your heart is set on the M5, go ahead. I've seen many for sale (not on eBay, though), but they mostly reach $1800 and thereabouts.

Good luck!
 
Todd and Francisco are right. While it seems they were a sort of ugly duckling some time ago the ones I see now ususally fetch more than M6 and TTLs...
 
I will never figure out why a camera that was so ugly that Leica's users forced the company to quit making it and return to producing the previous model should catch on 30 years later.

GIVE ME AN M3 any ol' day! M5's used to compete with the M4-2 for Cheap Used Leica. It's Ugly and Prone to Light Meter Failure!

(There, price should come back down for a little while)
 
:)_

Btw now that I have you here, what's so special about that camera ? Well the other day I found an article from teh Casanova magazine where they said it was the last of the Wetzlar machines, where all what was learned on the M2 and M3 was put together into a new camera with all the classic charm.

And of course the black one is black :)

Is that right ?
 
Yes, the M4 has the reputation as being the best of the Leica's. The M4-2 started a move to reduce production costs. BUT: The M3 still has the best viewfinder; the M4 viewfinder is essentially the one from the M2. It did not use as complex of an optical system as did the M3. My M2 finder is superb, and it is better than the VF/RF in any of my Canon's or Nikon's.

I found no difference in my M3 SN114xxxx and one just under 1M. The shutter of the M3SS is quieter than the M3DS, and the eye-relief for glasses is better. I am sure these carried over into the M4.
 
M4
last with engraved top plate M model

early black M4's were black enamel on brass, later ones were black chrome

first M with new rewind knob and quick load feature

I think it was the first M with 28mm framelines (I may be wrong)

not sure on whether all were built in Germany but most were.

The M4 is my next Leica, I hope!

Todd
 
HMMMM. Todd is starting over to work back to an M6. M3, M4, M5, M6.

I counted down. M3, M2,... M1? At least they are cheap!
 
Yes, saw some not that expensive M1's at KEH, not sure if they can still be upgraded to M2 though.

Thanks for the info on the M4 guys, if the M2 finder is better than any Nikon or Canon, and the M3 is still better than the M2 one, then I think I want to try the 40mm Rokkor on a M3...

That's in the future, that is :D

Btw merciful, the M5 and the CL are in fact not that far from each other, they could be seen as an abandoned design thread to which modern Leicas could have evolved, have you considered the little CL as well ?
 
Last edited:
Thanks, guys, for all the suggestions.

The CL won't do as a backup: I'm used to using longer lenses at wide apertures (as you've seen) and I don't think I could trust it in a critical situation.
 
True, what was I thinking about ? :bang: I have some shots wide open and dark on the CL but with a 35...

If you were using mainly LTM glass, a Canon 7 or P would do fine with its long base rangefinder. Good thing about the M5 is probably you'll be able to recover your full investment if it ends being not what you're looking for.
 
Todd

No 28mm framelines in the M4 I am afraid. Some, a very few, M4s were made by Elcan in Midland Ontario. Loads and rewinds slicker than my IIIf. Hope you find one.

Bob
 
Once again I'm out of step with everyone else. A couple of years ago I decided to sell off the cameras that I used less than others so I could buy more cameras that I might not use any more than the ones I sold. I'm sure that you guys know what I mean. Anyway, when I made a serious appraisal of what I really enjoyed using and used most the M6, M4-2 and CL went. The M5 and CLE stayed.

What I like most about the M5 are the meter accuracy, the relatively uncluttered viewfinder, matchneedle instead of led's, shutterspeed in the finder, shutter speed dial overhangs the front of the camera and in my opinion, the most positive loading of any M. What really puts me out of step is that I like the size and weight and even though mine is a three lug, I carry it on the end lugs.

I don't have any collapsible lenses so my only negative is using an external finder when I mount a 28.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom