M6 Classic or M5?

[BillBingham2]

Yeah, the M5 has more fans in this thread than I've met in the whole 25 years I've paid attention to Leica.

Time heals all wounds......

Based upon the OP's question I recommended the M5 as the differences in feel are material and might be better for him. As much as I loved my Leicas, I found the feel of Nikon rangefinders more to my liking. Doesn't mean I wouldn't LOVE and use a Lecia RF, frankly they ROCK.

When the M5 came out SLRs were driving the bus, folks wanted the M6 but the technology/price/reliability combo was there. My father told me of one guy who traded in a complete M3 system (including Visio and glass) on a single Leicaflex and two lenses.

B2 (;->

 

[Cyriljay]

I have voted for M6 and It was the one and only M camera that inspired me to get to know well and my ability to improve my photography. Reason was I owned many more Camera systems before I got to know my M6 which stays still with me as my overall favourite camera for 18 years . So I did not need the comparison to any other M cameras.

 

[raid]

I own two Leica M cameras: M3 and M6. I believe that in my hands these two cameras feel "at home". I have never missed the other M models. I once owned an M5, which I quickly sold for a small profit without using it.

 

[benlees]

I'm not sure why this almost 2 year old thread popped up but I will use the opportunity to say: digital M5:angel:

 

[Richard G]

The M5 was the first Leica I held and used a tiny bit. I soon had an M2. Years later, after M6, I bought a chrome M5. I no longer thought it ugly. It's beautiful. Just a great camera to use. In rain it is easier to protect the two lug hanging from my left shoulder. It is the best Leica for a bigger lens, especially the 50 Summiluxes, but even the ZM C Sonnar which balances perfectly on it. That lens always seems too big for the classically proportioned film Ms.

 

[Rob-F]

In fact the M5 was well under way when Leitz introduced the M4. Leitz introduced the M4 because the M3 was too expensive to produce and to sell. Many people bought a Japanese SLR in those days. The M2 sold better. The M4 is only an updated M2. It took Leitz much longer to introduce the M5 than anticipated. There are prototypes of the M5 with the indication "M4" on them, so from before 1967. The M5 was introduced four years later.

Erik.

The M4 began production in 1967 with No. 1175001. The first M5 (null series, according to my Hove guide) was in 1971. I was in NYC after the M5 had just begun arriving in stores and I handled a bright chrome M5. My reaction: "Yep. It's a Leica!" (The highest compliment that could be paid to a camera at the time!) There's nothing wrong with the M5. I own one today, of course.* The one I handled was regular production, which began with No. 1287001, and not the null series.

*Update: I now own two, of course. I wanted the 50 Jahre commemorative.

 

[Shab]

I really enjoy using my M5 and I'm really satisfied with the photos I make with it.

It isn't so big for me. But it is bigger than an OM-1. I use my M5 with 21mm and 35mm VM Ultrons. It's great to work with "it" .

I really like its viewfinder: great and clear.

One day I could take a M6 un my hands and it viewfinder wasn't so good for me.

But I'm sure that it's my feelings. You must discover which kind of camera you "love".

Best regards,
Xabier.

Enviado desde mi Aquaris E4 mediante Tapatalk

 

[sanmich]

I would love the M5 finder if I was a Picasso and my nose was 3 cm to the left of its current location.
I really love the finder placing on the extreme right of the camera on all the other Ms (and the Hexar X2 and other cameras). I can stick the camera against my nose comfortably and shoot without squeezing it like I do for SLRs.

 

[Richard G]

The M5 is great for very wide angle lenses: much easier to hold level and feel the flat plane of it so as to keep the film plane parallel to the subject.

 

[Deleted member 65559]

I would get the M6 every time. The M5 is large & ungainly, though some people like it. The classic M2,3,4,6,7 shape is an artistic achievement and an ergonomic joy.

 

[narsuitus]

When I was shopping for my first 35mm Leica rangefinder to use with a 35, 90, 21 lens combo, I narrowed my search to an M2, M4, M6, and MP. I purchased the M6. I never considered the M5 because at that time, the M5 was receiving a lot of bad press.


Leica M6 by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[pepeguitarra]

I have both M5 & M6 and love both. I have big hands and use my big lenses (Canon 50/1.2, Voigtlander 35/1.2) on the M5, they fit nicely. I like the way it hangs sideways. I also like the M6 when I do not want to call attention, it looks smaller. Meter on the M5 works if cocked, however, if you hold it vertically, it will not work, only horizontally. Meter on M5 is analog, not digital as in the M6. The M5 was the mother of the M6, with all the good stuff the new engineers thought to make the perfect camera. However, it was modified to become the M6 to keep the Leica standard look. Go wild, go individual, go M5.

 

[steveyork]

Having used all the metered film Leica Ms over the last two decades (M5, M6, M6ttl, MP, M7), I view the M5 as best of the breed. It looks large and ungainly, but once in the hand it is surprisingly ergonomic. Similar to the R8/9 and and Leicaflex SL in this regard, and there's a very satisfying build quality of the M5 and earlier cameras. Different from the cameras that came later. Consider also whether you prefer a needle meter display (M5) or diodes (M6). I now shoot an M3 because of the higher magnification viewfinder, but the M5 was a very nice camera. Sensitive meter too.

 

[creenus]

Alan Starkie now repairs M5 cameras:

https://www.cameraworks-uk.com/price-list

I don't know about repainting them, but one could always ask him.

 

[Deleted member 65559]

While the CL may have been considered unreliable, I used them and the CLE for rock climbing, mountaineering & alaskan climbing expeditions during the late '70s early '80s. Nary a problem & great results. I had an M5 too, but like the CL...in the end my favourite was the M2 (would that I hadn't sold the black paint one I bought in Paris for $500 in the late '80s). Like guitars & other tools, I'm much influenced by how the tool feels in my hands. That's why I use an old Deardorff instead of the beautiful Ebony or Canhams I've owned; the controls allow for instinctive use.

 

[fotomeow]

As Eric stated, the M5 was a commercial failure, not a technical one.
I’m sure one could find a list of well known photographers who used the M5 in their work.

M5 better for longer lenses due to VF, better for those with big hands, better for a “working photographer” where size of cam and discreetness is less a factor. Sherry Krauter always touted how much she preferred this Leica over others, particulately with older 50mms.
I would consider the M5 more of a Pro camera, and the M6 more of a recreational Leica, though of course is a great camera in and of itself.

M6 better for wider lenses and of course built in 28 mm frame lines. Better for smaller hands, more discrete, lighter.

Naturally, best combo would be to keep a 50mm glued to the M5 and a 28mm or 35mm on the M6, and leave it at that.

 

[ptpdprinter]

Bodies are not that expensive. Get one of each. Lenses on the other hand...well, you can use them on both bodies. If you decide you prefer one body over the other, you can always sell it on with minimal loss. Experiencing them for yourself will tell you what your preference is, not the preference of some random guy on the internet, however well intentioned he may be.

 

[d_c]

M6 Classic every time - pretty much the perfect 35mm film camera.

 

[Nokton48]

I had my M2 and M5 at the same time. What I really loved was that the viewfinders were identical, switching back and forth between the two bodies. That was important to me at the time. And build quality was similar, also important to me.

 

[Huss]

M6 Classic every time - pretty much the perfect 35mm film camera.

because u own one?

🙂