M6 or...?

I bought my M6 (black chrome, classic, not TTL) about 2 years ago. I paid about $1100 for it, and I believe prices have crept up since then. I can't speak about the ZI, but I doubt it will retain it's value like an M6.

Oh yeah, I love the M6. The meter is excellent, the lines are clean and beautiful, it feels great in my hamds.

Leica lenses are pricey, so I personally like the other options available-- Canon, Jupiter, etc.

You'll never regret buying a Leica (assuming you don't overpay).
 
I think it depends on your shooting style. If using the camera is a big part of the experience to you, go for the M. If you're less concerned with that and just want a great camera and great lenses, go for the Ikon.

I have an M6 and I thoroughly love using it, but there are practical things like a big viewfinder, automatic exposure, standard film loading (I love the Leica system, some don't) that would certainly be nice to have.

Either way I'd opt for a Zeiss lens.
 
If you really need the built-in meter, go for the M6.

If you can live without it, consider of buying an M3 or M2. With a CLA they will be about the same price and they do have a better built quality than the M6.
 
1 vote for a ZI

1 vote for a ZI

Well you have plenty of opinions already on the m6 side, but I'll chime in for the ZI. I was in the same position recently, looking at both the m6 and the ikon, and for me it came down to a few different things.

The ZI has the biggest and brightest viewfinder. Period.

Another reason was ae. I've used plenty of fully manual cameras, with and without meters, but the fact is aperture priority is nice to have. If you want to exclusively shoot fully manual with a built in meter, fine, just don't turn the dial to auto. But there's going to be situations where you'll wish you had it.

I was able to buy it brand new (at a discounted rate for the box being opened from B&H). I'm positive that it hasn't had a sketchy past, I don't have to guess or trust someone else to know when it was last cla'd, and I have a warranty.

Then there's the 1/2000 shutter speed on the ZI.

Next, it wasn't a dealbreaker, but I enjoy having a hinged film door with a window to see what film I'm shooting.

Ultimately, when weighing the two cameras back and forth, there were no advantages of an m6 except for the build quality (the ZI is certainly solid though) and the red dot. Who knows, maybe one day I'll end up with an m6 as everyone one this forum implies is inevitable. But the ZI is an excellent camera, fun to use, and had a few comfortable advantages over an m6 for me.
 
Last edited:
Turtle said:
M6 classic, late model, 35 biogon F2
Click to expand...

I agree, he M6 and Ziess. The 35 is a great all-purpose lens, plenty fast and renders beautifully. You will even have some cash left over for a second lens, bag, film, tank, reel, developer, stop solution, fixer, hangers and a scanner;)
 
I have both the ZI's and the M6's. For a first foray into rangefinders i would suggest the M6 - later, if you feel you need it, you can always add the ZI (it does have certain advantages - including the best finder of any rangefinder and the AE system).
As for lenses. depends on your style and intent for using it. Start with a 35mm and use it for an extended period of time. Rangefinders usually require a bit of a "learning curve" - and the M6/35 combination is most likely the best starter kit ( and could end up being all you ever need or want).
Which lens? They are all good! If you intend to do a lot of low-light work - go for the Nokton 35f1.4 MC (for color) or SC (for black/white) - and that one you can get new with warranty et al. The Summicron's are OK, but for the money you fork out for a used, probably 20-25 year old lens - you can get new glass that is as good or better. Leica lens prices are at the moment "hyped" and have no relation to performance.
My personal favorite is the C Biogon 35f2.8 - it is about as good a 35mm lens you can find by anyone (including Leica). If you need more speed, Biogon 35f2 is as good as the Summicron's and if you need even more speed, Nokton 35f1.4. Any of these should be well within your budget and leave you with lots of change for film.
The M6 "bargains" tend to be the M6TTL's - and if you are going for a 35 as your prime lens - look for a 0.58 finder one as that gives you an easy 35 frame + possibility for a 28 down the road - but still usable with a 50 mm too.
 
WOW. I didn't expect this much help from everyone on here.

WOW. I didn't expect this much help from everyone on here.

Thank you for all of the help and answers to my questions.

I have thought a lot about the certain advantages to the ZI like you pointed out PhillipAbbott. I really like the ability of AE and 1/2000. Also I wear glasses and have read that the ZI viewfinder works well for people with four eyes.

Does anyone know how much better the viewfinder is in the ZI and will I be at a major disadvantage if I used an M6 while wearing glasses?

I appreciate all of the suggestions, Tom A, and I was wondering what the advantages are between the .58 .72 and .85 viewfinders. I should really look that up.

Thank you,
Brett
 
.58, .72, .85 - depends on what you are going to shoot really. .85, better for wide angle. .72 - allaround goodness, .85 - 35 will be hard or impossible to see with glasses on, but rocks for 50 and 90mm. Since you where glasses I'd rule out the .,85 unless you plan to only shoot above 50mm. .58 would work well for a glasses wearer and you could always by an eyepiece magnifier to take it out to .72. If you like to shoot wide - think about a Bessa R4A. Has the same shutter speed, AE and viewfinder advantage of the ZI, but costs a lot less. It's great for 21, 25, 28 and 35mm lenses. You will have a shorter baselength (poorer focusing accuracy) but if you have the 21mm at f/8, it's not going to be an issue anyway. And new it will cost less than half the price of a used M6 or new ZI.

Although I opted for a pricier Leica Summarit 35mm - I'd recommend the Zeiss f/2 or 2.8 in 35mm - you really can't go too wrong at this focal length!

I'd also recommend the 50mm Zeiss Planar. Great lens at a great price. But... you can totally toss all of my recommendations because an M6 with any 35mm lens will still be awesome. Try to get a rangefinder in your hands. You'll know pretty quickly what YOU want.

And good on ya for getting good marks!
 
M6 ttl and 35 mm summicron. Since you are starting fresh you won't be deterred by the "wrong way " speed dial. And you can set speeds with your finger tip on the oversiZe dial without taking your eyes off the view finder. They are all about 10 years old so won't need a cla( the advice of dag). DAG ( best leica repairman) is converting mine to the flare free viewfinder and m3 advance lever currently. According to him. An overhaul is only required after 20 years of use. Or if it has sat unused for 20 years. Make sure to exercise the slow speeds between rolls. Enjoy your leica. You are very lucky
Nik
 
Congrats to all the graduates! Tons of good advice here.

Just a vote for the M6 and a nice 35 - my favorite combo.

When I finished my Masters (part-time evenings), I rewarded myself with some other Leica glass - 8x42 Trinovids :) - since I already had the M6 and lenses.

Enjoy and good luck!
 
Last edited:
I've got both the ZI and the M6 and a couple of Zeiss lenses. I got the ZI new and was lucky to get it at about 40% less than RRP. It's an excellently designed camera and is easy to use. I decided I wanted a second body (one for B&W film and one for colour slide) and was going to get a second ZI but saw a mint M6 ttl for €400 less than the price of a new ZI, so I got it.

In my opinion the M6 is the better built camera but I wouldn't be without the ZI. Personally, I wouldn't even consider a non-ttl M6 because of the fiddly little shutter speed knob. Recommendation: if you can get a mint M6 ttl for less than the price of a new ZI then buy it. Otherwise get a new ZI and keep your eye on the second hand market for an M6.

Oh yes: I wear glasses and have trouble with neither and the M6 is an 0.85.
 
I went from Zeiss Ikon to Leica M6, kind of on a whim. Right now, I've probably not given the Leica enough of a chance to endear itself to me. However, ZI, I loved from day one. It's probably a "reverse snobbish" thing, but sometimes I think the Leica brand is over-hyped and unfairly that leads me to prefer the Ikon to the M6. However, in the cold light of day, I'd say you could weigh the two up like this:

M6:
As much as I like the Ikon, the M6 is somewhat more solid, probably due to the lack of a back door.
No AE will make you consider exposures more carefully, you don't have to use AE on the Ikon though, of course.
Fewer buttons than the ZI, which I think is nice.

Ikon:
Better, brighter viewfinder.
Aperture priority, good if you're in something of a hurry, which for holiday shots, we often are.
Window to see what film you've got in there.
Hinged film back.

And that's about it. You can't go wrong with either, Leica service guys are easier to find, however, my experience with Zeiss themselves is wonderful. I will throw this out there though:

Consider a Bessa, a nice lens, and leave a little money for a medium format camera too? You could also consider a Leica M3 if you don't mind not having a meter at all, which for negative film (not slide) is not as bad as it seems.
 
The insight you all have given me is incredible.

The insight you all have given me is incredible.

I am really grateful for all of the help provided to me on this forum.

segedi, thank you for the help with the viewfinder magnification. I never knew the difference.

I appreciate the congratulations for graduation. I will finally be moving to a photographer friendly place (Madison, WI) and will really get a lot of use out of perhaps my new M6?

brokencivilian your flickr page is outstanding. Did you graduate in art or photography? Either way, congratulations.
 
VF magnification is a personal thing and whether or not you wear glasses is a major factor. Without glasses, the 35mm frame in a 0.72 is fine, while a 28mm frame squashed into the same magnification is quite hard to use. With glasses, the 50mm frame in a 0.72 is the biggest you can use easily.

So why not just buy the 0.58? Well, the bigger the better for focusing, and a 90mm will be very hard to focus (I can't even get a 90mm focused accurately all the time on a 0.72).

So decide what the widest lens you'll use with the inbuilt VF is going to be: 28, 35 or 50. Remember that you can always use an accessory finder. Then pick the highest-magnification finder that allows you to comfortably see that frameline. If you (like some people) skip the 35mm and 28mm and go 21/24mm, 50mm, 90mm, you can get a 0.85 finder and be happy. Or even a 0.91 finder, if you end up with an M3!
 
I've had both, and would have kept both if I didn't have to free up some cash. To me it comes down to AE and the finder. As a glasses wearer I could see the whole 28mm frameline on the ZI, whereas on the M6 0.72 I can't quite see it, +1 ZI. Whereas for my film shooting I prefer manual operation with the arrows in the finder, +1 M6. I kept only the M6 but had the ZI about a year versus the M6 about 3 months. Ask me again towards December and we'll see if I plan to stick with the M6, switch back to ZI, or buy another ZI and keep both. ;)
 
In my line of work (mainframe systems programmer-- you know, the old "dinosaur" computers which became obsolete in the 1990's?), there is a saying, that nobody ever got fired for buying IBM equipment. I think the ZI vs. Leica argument is analogous. Leica is the gold standard of rangefinders. That's not meant to disparage Zeiss in any way, however.
 
I didn't mention what I was using it for, my mistake. I plan to do mostly street photography.

I appreciate the help roger with finding which would be the right magnification.
I plan on using a 28 and 35 lens mostly and would probably get an accessory finder if I get anything wider.
If I went to 90mm I could probably just use a [d]slr.
So is .58 what I am suited for?

Thanks

Brett
 
That is a very good point crawdiddy.
I think I will be buying an m6 however everyone here seems to favor the classic versus the ttl. I guess I would have thought the ttl would be better with the ttl flash and everything but maybe not.

What makes the classics better?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom