cnphoto
Well-known
Always so many decisions! I'm selling all of my Hasselblad kit (in the classifieds) since getting a Leica I haven't so much as looked at it. and I am, eventually, looking to get a 4x5.
In the meantime, with the money from the Hassy kit I can do a number of things. I could get a metered body (I really do not enjoy using the VC II Meter I recently purchased, clunky and awkward for me), in which case I would probably look at an M6 Classic. Or I can sell the VC meter anyway and go back to using a handheld meter as I have with the Hasselblad for a long time now.
In which case if I keep the M4-P, I could look at buying a Leica 35mm (probably a pre-Asph 'lux for that specific look, or a pre-asph 'cron). Currently my only wide is the CV 28mm F2.8, and I find it a touch too wide often. Or I could probably even look at a 35mm Asph 'cron...
The other thing is, I went in to a camera dealer today and looked through an M6 TTL VF and the frame lines and patch where a little crisper and easier to view then my M4-P... and I also picked up and used an MP (I have used a friends MP before, incredible cameras). So maybe I could also hunt around for a good price on a used black MP body?
If I go the M6 Classic or 35mm lens (non-Asph) then I'll have change left over that I can put towards film and other things as well. I really do enjoy using my M4-P... it's just the VF that is worrying, I have had issues focusing in low light and the crisper VF and brighter frame lines of the M6 TTL may be easier to use in that situation (I also think that my M4-P may need a vertical RF adjustment so that may fix things up too...
I guess, my question is, those who have used metered and non-metered M's and can use both. Have you found the built-in meter to be that much of a benefit? And, if I was to go metered, should I hold out for an MP? though, I may find myself less inclined to use it and throw it around for fear of damaging the beautiful finish. It really is a thing of beauty.
In the meantime, with the money from the Hassy kit I can do a number of things. I could get a metered body (I really do not enjoy using the VC II Meter I recently purchased, clunky and awkward for me), in which case I would probably look at an M6 Classic. Or I can sell the VC meter anyway and go back to using a handheld meter as I have with the Hasselblad for a long time now.
In which case if I keep the M4-P, I could look at buying a Leica 35mm (probably a pre-Asph 'lux for that specific look, or a pre-asph 'cron). Currently my only wide is the CV 28mm F2.8, and I find it a touch too wide often. Or I could probably even look at a 35mm Asph 'cron...
The other thing is, I went in to a camera dealer today and looked through an M6 TTL VF and the frame lines and patch where a little crisper and easier to view then my M4-P... and I also picked up and used an MP (I have used a friends MP before, incredible cameras). So maybe I could also hunt around for a good price on a used black MP body?
If I go the M6 Classic or 35mm lens (non-Asph) then I'll have change left over that I can put towards film and other things as well. I really do enjoy using my M4-P... it's just the VF that is worrying, I have had issues focusing in low light and the crisper VF and brighter frame lines of the M6 TTL may be easier to use in that situation (I also think that my M4-P may need a vertical RF adjustment so that may fix things up too...
I guess, my question is, those who have used metered and non-metered M's and can use both. Have you found the built-in meter to be that much of a benefit? And, if I was to go metered, should I hold out for an MP? though, I may find myself less inclined to use it and throw it around for fear of damaging the beautiful finish. It really is a thing of beauty.
Last edited:
Chris101
summicronia
I have a fourpee and a 35mm is my only lens for it. It is a wonderful combination, as the viewfinder is at the perfect magnification. I don't worry about metering usually, using The Force and all, or I meter with a Luna Pro if I need to double check the Force.
I like that it is so minimal.
I like that it is so minimal.
Ronald M
Veteran
It is CV, Cosina Voitlander.
maddoc
... likes film again.
I have gone through all M-Leicas (except the M4-2, M1, and MDs) and kept my M4-P + M7. What I like about the M4-P is that it is the last one with the larger frame-lines for 50mm, far more exact for my way of perception / shooting. The M7 I like for AE, very helpful for slide-films and when I don't want to use a hand-held meter.
What I don't like about the M5, M6, M6TTL, MP is that you have to bring the camera to your eye to meter, bring it down to set the shutter-speed and then again to your eye to focus and compose. Especially with the M6 classic and MP I found it very difficult to set the shutter-speed while looking through the VF due to the to small shutter-speed dial. The M5 (and CL) are much easier to use this way, the M6TTL lesser.
The VF of the M4-P can get hazy with time because Leica changed some sealing material which degases over time. Cleaning should bring your VF back to very good performance. Also the Leica MR-4 meter is a good option for the M4-P, I use mine more and more and leave the Seconic Twin-Mate at home.
What I don't like about the M5, M6, M6TTL, MP is that you have to bring the camera to your eye to meter, bring it down to set the shutter-speed and then again to your eye to focus and compose. Especially with the M6 classic and MP I found it very difficult to set the shutter-speed while looking through the VF due to the to small shutter-speed dial. The M5 (and CL) are much easier to use this way, the M6TTL lesser.
The VF of the M4-P can get hazy with time because Leica changed some sealing material which degases over time. Cleaning should bring your VF back to very good performance. Also the Leica MR-4 meter is a good option for the M4-P, I use mine more and more and leave the Seconic Twin-Mate at home.
cnphoto
Well-known
Thanks maddoc. I think I may clean the VF and carry a handheld meter again for a bit and see how I fair, the M socket has cracked and the outlet socket has fallen out I have replacement parts on order so will clean the VF when I install the new flash parts.
Acliff
Established
you previously criticised my VC abbreviation in another thread, if you are going to be pedantic, the spelling is actually 'Cosina Voigtländer'
kbg32
neo-romanticist
MP. Built like a brick ****house. You can use the meter or not.
thomasw_
Well-known
Well said, kbg32.
How many responses to your question can be boiled down to two terse letters: MP ? Now, do you know why this is the case?
It is because the MP rocks. There are ways of side stepping this fact, but to those who know the MP, there is nothing for it, the truth that the MP rocks is just a way of life.
cnphoto
Well-known
an MP (once the Hasselblad kit has sold) is just out of my budget I think... very tempting though. very.
coelacanth
Ride, dive, shoot.
Well said! I also have an M2 because I can't afford another MP. If I could, I would.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
I would have the M4P finder cleaned and get the pre-asph Summilux and several bricks of film!
The M6/MP are convinient to use with the built in meters - but i find that for most shooting the bright red arrows/dots are more of an irritant than anything else. I do use metered cameras when I am using film that is not 400/250 iso as it reminds me that whatever film in the camera is not TrX/XX and a bit more thought should go into exposure settings.
Unless you are shooting K64 or any film with narrow exposure latitude - you can get away with quite a bit of guesswork.
The MP is a very good camera - but not that much better than a well seasoned M4P. The Classic M6 is just a M4P with a meter built in. The M6 TTL is somewhat improved with higher meter sensitivity - but also the "wrong way" shutter speed dial - and some problems with the battery drain issue.
Unless you want/need a specific finder magnification (0.58/0.85) stick to what you have, clean the finder and get a lens that you want. The camera is just a box that holds film and has a shutter speed control in it. It is the lens that ultimately makes the pictures!
The M6/MP are convinient to use with the built in meters - but i find that for most shooting the bright red arrows/dots are more of an irritant than anything else. I do use metered cameras when I am using film that is not 400/250 iso as it reminds me that whatever film in the camera is not TrX/XX and a bit more thought should go into exposure settings.
Unless you are shooting K64 or any film with narrow exposure latitude - you can get away with quite a bit of guesswork.
The MP is a very good camera - but not that much better than a well seasoned M4P. The Classic M6 is just a M4P with a meter built in. The M6 TTL is somewhat improved with higher meter sensitivity - but also the "wrong way" shutter speed dial - and some problems with the battery drain issue.
Unless you want/need a specific finder magnification (0.58/0.85) stick to what you have, clean the finder and get a lens that you want. The camera is just a box that holds film and has a shutter speed control in it. It is the lens that ultimately makes the pictures!
cnphoto
Well-known
that is the sensible thing to do, and I think that is what I wil do. The only other Leica lenses I have are in transit to me at the moment. a type-1 Elmarit-M 90mm that is an Xmas gift and a Summitar F2 I picked up for my IIIc (and M4-P via an adapter). The Voightlander lenses (28 & Nokton 50) are nice and all, but a Leica 35 on the M4-P is very appealing.
i think that a Leica 35mm would be good, provided I can find a clean, sharp example for under AUD$2,000.00 (USD$1,800.00).
tightsqueez
Well-known
I'm with Tom A. Get your finder upgraded (MP type). I love my M6 but the meter annoys me and it only gets used with slide film or narrow latitude black and white. The great thing though is that you can always take the batteries out and always have that metered option. Over the last 20 years I have gravitated towards two approaches: either I want the metering done for me (M7) or I don't want to be bothered with something telling me the exposure is under or over (Barnacks - M4-P). This is why I will never touch the MP.
Someone had mentioned that the small shutter dials are difficult to adjust while looking through the VF. Not sure what the issue is but every one that I have ever used was pretty effortless.
Use the extra dough for film or better yet dip into a 4x5 and then you'll really learn some things, most of which will reflect on your 35mm work.
Someone had mentioned that the small shutter dials are difficult to adjust while looking through the VF. Not sure what the issue is but every one that I have ever used was pretty effortless.
Use the extra dough for film or better yet dip into a 4x5 and then you'll really learn some things, most of which will reflect on your 35mm work.
kipkeston
Well-known
There's zero benefit to buying the MP.
Get the M6 with upgraded VF. The meter is handy, you'll use it.
Get the M6 with upgraded VF. The meter is handy, you'll use it.
alexz
Well-known
Frankly I always wondering why people yet attempt to apply auto-metering SLR approach to RF shooting...
I do shoot with either M3, M6 or M7 and have never being troubled by in-camera meter of slowing me down or whatever with M6 or M7, or just with M3.
Just having a hand-held, meter the surroundings once, set the base exposure and you're done being able to shoot instantly. In most cases there is vary rare then more then 2 brightness zone areas in surrounding, just meter both and then you're set, switching exposures instantly once altering the lighting zones.
With M6 it even becomes easier: meter once the base exposure and shot with it unless capturing different brightness zone - then the correction is a matter of a second adjusting aperture swiftly while the arrows hint the direction and the required amount of the correction.
I even used to apply that practice with M7 a well, albeit being able to rely on its AE (which proved to be quite good BTW).
I do shoot with either M3, M6 or M7 and have never being troubled by in-camera meter of slowing me down or whatever with M6 or M7, or just with M3.
Just having a hand-held, meter the surroundings once, set the base exposure and you're done being able to shoot instantly. In most cases there is vary rare then more then 2 brightness zone areas in surrounding, just meter both and then you're set, switching exposures instantly once altering the lighting zones.
With M6 it even becomes easier: meter once the base exposure and shot with it unless capturing different brightness zone - then the correction is a matter of a second adjusting aperture swiftly while the arrows hint the direction and the required amount of the correction.
I even used to apply that practice with M7 a well, albeit being able to rely on its AE (which proved to be quite good BTW).
cnphoto
Well-known
I decided to purchase a M3 DS instead. I recently purchased a 90mm Elmarit-M because my first love is shooting people/portraits, and I have missed having a portrait lens / tele lens. After receiving the chrome 90 I thought that the M3 would be a good choice (and probably a good alternative to an MP), the small 90 frame lines in the M4-P are... usable. But bigger would be better/easier to focus and compose with.
M3 with the 90mm (or my Summitar 50, or Nokton 50 with an adapter) and slow speed film (ISO 25-100) for portraits with studio lighting/bright available light, and the M4-P loaded with Tri-X and the CV 28mm for general/everyday/walkaround use and then my IIIc loaded with Neopan 1600 or a pushed roll of Tri-X with the Summitar or Nokton mounted for night shooting etc.
I've found that moving from Medium format over to predominantely shooting 35mm, I often am half way or 3/4 of the way through a roll and I need to change it out because the film speed is innapropriate for the next shooting environment and then when I reload it at a later date I often loose a frame or 3 (so I'm not double exposing any past images). it is time consuming and a PITA.
M3 with the 90mm (or my Summitar 50, or Nokton 50 with an adapter) and slow speed film (ISO 25-100) for portraits with studio lighting/bright available light, and the M4-P loaded with Tri-X and the CV 28mm for general/everyday/walkaround use and then my IIIc loaded with Neopan 1600 or a pushed roll of Tri-X with the Summitar or Nokton mounted for night shooting etc.
I've found that moving from Medium format over to predominantely shooting 35mm, I often am half way or 3/4 of the way through a roll and I need to change it out because the film speed is innapropriate for the next shooting environment and then when I reload it at a later date I often loose a frame or 3 (so I'm not double exposing any past images). it is time consuming and a PITA.
Last edited: