M6 or M4-p

Don't forget that the M6 is going to be a younger camera, esp if you get a later serial or a TTL (which has the nice larger shutter dial, though it goes the "wrong way")
 
M6 without a doubt. After having used an M3 I vowed to _never_ have a meterless camera again unless I already have a metered camera with me too.
 
Joop van Heijgen said:
'"There is nothing boring per se with good exposures, but there are no surprises either! Sometimes I find that we are obsessed with correctly exposed shots and that achiving these takes to much time (fiddling with aperture rings and speed dials) rather than shoot "now". It sometimes is akin to "chimping" the digital. Far to often you see digital shooters staring at the back of the camera, whilst the really good shots are happening in front of them!'
__________________
Tom Abrahamsson
Flickr: Photos from T&T and Mr B
RapidWinder.com Home
Click to expand...

Yes I remember reading that too, puts it quite well :)
 
Outside on the street, by myself, hand-held meter or guessing is OK and sometimes liberating.

Indoors or with people, a built in meter is more convenient - in particular to avoid holding a meter in front of people's faces.

Get the M6, even though the M4P is a great camera.

Roland.
 
D-M said:
Thanks for the replies. The M6 seems to make consensus, the M4-P very close as well. I still have to think about that deal on the M4-P. I forgot to mention it comes with the Leica meter, and I was wrong about the lens, it's not a 28mm but a 35/2.8 summaron. I’m going to meet the seller this evening. So if there is something specific to look at, please tell me. The price is actually at 1600$ CAD, it's negotiable.

This afternoon I received an offer thru a friend of a friend, it's a M6 with 35/2mm and 50/2mm Summicron and a 90/2.8 Elmarit for 3500$ CAD, it looks very good regarding the picture he sent with. I haven’t talk with this seller so far, and I guess it’s negotiable. That makes me more to think about. It’s more than I wanted to put for the budget, but there is two interesting lens, coming with it. That looks like a ready to go.

Again if there is things to check carefully before I buy, let me know.
Click to expand...

If you can afford the extra, the M6 deal looks good.
Do all the usual checks - sound of the shutter, at all speeds, foggy viewfinders, rangefinder image - does it merge at infinity/minimum focus, does it merge vertivcally? Shine a torch through the lens, any dust in there? fungus? Oil on the diaphragm blades? I could go on, but I'm sure you get the picture. Good luck.
 
Meter-less is a Philosophy !

M6's viewfinder is very sensitive to flare, know that !
However, the M4-P is so close to the M6 in lots of aspects that i'd go for the M6 too.

M3 & M2 teach you light and shadows, masterpieces ! :)
 
Another difference between the M4-P and the M6: the top plate!

As long as the M4-P stood alone in the M-family (between 1980 and 1984) it had the well known brass top plate.

With the introduction of the M6 in 1984 it got the same cast zinc top plate.
 
Flogging off your SLR gear to buy a Leica is a big move - it's one I took but only after shooting with a Canonet QL17 GIII - the most ridiculous named camera ever. Incidently, I bought an M4-P after asking myself the same questions. As far as I'm concerned, it was the right decision as it saved me a bit of ££ for film and I had long ago learnt to get by without a meter - I indeed agree with those who say they find it gets in their way - HOWEVER - this is a deeply personal thing - and I only shoot Tri-X and XP2 which both have enormous latitude in this manner. On the rare occasions I shoot colour, I carry a meter.

Selling up a universal camera system to pay for a very specialised one is a big step - I really would suggest that you buy a fixed lens rangefinder which are available for pocket money to give the concept a try before burning your boats.

I'd also take a long hard look at a Zeiss Ikon - it might just be the better camera. It doesn't have the snob appeal of the Leica - which is why I didn't buy it - unfortunately, I need to guarantee the resale.
 
A 35mm f2.8 Summaron is a very desireable lens, worth what, $600? If you can get an M4-P with 2.8 Summaron for $1000 (which is what you can get an M6 for), that would be a good deal.
 
Damaso said:
Don't forget that the M6 is going to be a younger camera, esp if you get a later serial or a TTL (which has the nice larger shutter dial, though it goes the "wrong way")
Click to expand...

Kinda/sorta. Most M6es are >10 years, and some are >20. Many are getting due, or past due, for a CLA anyway...

Pablito said:
Just be aware that if you are going to use a 75mm lens the frame lines for this lens are MUCH better in teh M6. M4-P only gives you little corners, no real lines.
Click to expand...

True - the M4-P has only the little corner-ettes. The M6 adds 4 horizontal lines.
 
The M6 was my first Leica, the M4-P is the Leica I currently use (together with an M3 DS) The build-in meter can have advantages in the beginning, when somebody thinks more about how to get a photo than concentrating on the subject. Later, I found the two LEDs (MP) or three (M6) very distracting. I always used a hand-held meter for the reason, that bringing the camera to the eye, measure the correct exposure, set the correct exposure, focus and then compose takes to long time. But this is my personal preference...

Regarding only the camera, I would go with the M4-P and later add an M7. If you have a good deal on the lenses, decide with priority for the lenses. Just my two cents ...
 
I am totally biased in favor of the M4-P. I love this camera. It's rugged and a true workhorse. The steal gears I can feel them. Solidly built and super sexy thing.

But if you need the meter, by all means go with the M6.
 
Oddly enough these are my two choices I am looking for for my first M mount. I keep seeing deals on M4-P's but sadly have to wait until June to catch one.
 
maddoc said:
The M6 was my first Leica, the M4-P is the Leica I currently use (together with an M3 DS) The build-in meter can have advantages in the beginning, when somebody thinks more about how to get a photo than concentrating on the subject. Later, I found the two LEDs (MP) or three (M6) very distracting. I always used a hand-held meter for the reason, that bringing the camera to the eye, measure the correct exposure, set the correct exposure, focus and then compose takes to long time. But this is my personal preference...

Regarding only the camera, I would go with the M4-P and later add an M7. If you have a good deal on the lenses, decide with priority for the lenses. Just my two cents ...
Click to expand...

I agree a 100%, that's the way I feel too. :)
 
I have a M6 TTL 0.58 that I love for the high eye release (yep...wear glasses).

If I would have to make a choice I would choose the M4-P BUT... not the newer version.

The reason is that I found the M6 frames very unprecise. bearable for a 35mm lens but really bad for a 50mm FL. My M2 is way better in that regard. The frame shrinking appears to have occur at the late stages of the M4-P. I think you can identify new M4-P versions as having a flushed vs recessed VF window.
a byproduct of this choice would be also that you get the brass top vs zinc...
 
Is it me. or does it seem like there have been more M4 cameras for sale on this site? I don't have an M4 or M6, but when I shoot my meterless Zorki, I find that I am having a running conversation in my head about what the exposure would be as a I look around. I'm usually changing the exposure settings and approximate pre-focusing so I just bring up the camera to my eye, set the composition and shoot.

To me, that is an interesting skill and a way to really connect with the process, which is fine if you can dedicate that much attention. Inside, one in a lifetime shots, I might want to have an M6 to make sure that I'm pretty close.
 
I owned both, sold the M6 first about a month ago and the M4-P a day or two ago. While the M4-P was the first Leica I purchased, I like her better. While built in meter is very handy, I've gotten very good with an incident meter over the years and I like the cleaner viewfinder (no LEDs). The cost of CLA was much different between the M4-P and M6 (much more expensive). Put the money saved into some fun glass and film/processing/scanning.

Either way you will not go wrong, both are GREAT cameras. But have you looked at the......

B2 (;->
 
About metering:

I sometimes use a leicameter MR. It adds to the bulk of the camera but it is great, and I find it quicker than the M6 meter, specially for street photography since you can set exposition BEFORE you bring the camera to your eye.

why don't new Leica allow exposure reading from above the camera a la Nikon F/F2 ?

Yeah, right, it would be a shame to spoil such a top...
 
Alas I may already be too late with my 2 cents.

If you can't shoot without a built-in meter constantly aiding you, go for the M6.

If you'd like to know how to shoot without a meter, M4-P all the way :)

The former will probably (in the beginning) net you more printable pictures, but the latter is more rewarding, IMHO.

... and no, using M4-P *doesn't* mean you stick a meter in front of everyone's face :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom