M6-TTL instead of an MP - from the FWIW Dept

[roscoetuff]

Having combed through sites discussing the Leica MP and M6-TTL and come very close to pulling the trigger on an MP, thought I'd doc "for the record" how I resolved this... as it's pretty simple.

1) MP looks cool. Love the look. Probably would love this baby. BUT the price is more than I want to do for a film Leica.

2) Why? Because I'm neither ready to leave digital and go 100% film, nor am I ready to spring for a digital Leica 'cause I haven't really sorted that through yet and the wallet damage is significantly higher than I'm familiar with - so far, and I'm not sure Leica has really reached a stable point yet with their development. I suspect the M10 moves the MUCH closer, but there's still a 36mp or 42mp ahead somewhere that will put them even with the others.

3) I did want to add an in-camera meter for those more spontaneous shots. That said, I prefer off-camera metering to exercise complete control, but it's handy to have your preference prove additive rather than limiting.

4) The "cool" look on the MP is to me a matter of two items: 1) Dot color ("Red" just draws too much attention) and 2) Film advance crank. These positives for the MP are not deal breakers for the M6. To even these two up, DAG has an alternative black dot you can switch out on the M6 - if it's really a problem, or black tape could handle that, too; and Popflash has a rewind crank that could be used as a replacement on the MP.

5) Positives for the M6 TTL are: 1) Rewind crank; and 2) Larger more easily manipulated shutter speed dial - large enough (I think) to make reaching it easier when there's an external viewfinder attached to the flash shoe.

Wanted to tell myself there were more material differences than this, but as much as there probably are - and there is that bit about the brass (MP) vs. whatever (M6) base plates, but I just couldn't get excited about that. Given my M4-2 doesn't seem to suffer for it's construction, and folks like to fault that out the wazoo, I couldn't get excited about this as worth an extra $1000 to $1700 USED and more for new. I will say that the MP seems to have a more rational pricing stream (meaning less variance) than the M6, but then the M6 has all manner of craziness there.

So it came down to a dealer I knew with an M6 TTL in great condition and a well known dealer I didn't know who also made it clear he didn't know me either. And it came down to saving a bundle that can be used later either for digital or another lens. Longer term, adding a digital M may mean I dump the Sony and those lenses and cut the whole gear thing down... which would make me a happy man. Some day. Not now.

 

[mpaniagua]

Only plus on the MP (and it is a huge plus for some) is that MP is a newer model, so in theory,it will perform better and for a longer time. That said, my M6 is working like a charm, no issues there, so I wouldnt go the MP road anytime soon.

...2) Larger more easily manipulated shutter speed dial - large enough (I think) to make reaching it easier when there's an external viewfinder attached to the flash shoe...

For the records, I dont find it particularly difficult to reach the speed dial on my M6 with extenal viewfinder attached. Sometimes use Leica 35mm viewfinder (SLBOO), 28mm (SLOOZ) and sometimes 50mm (SB00I), depending on subject and mood 🙂. Perhaps Im used to it, but who knows.


Regards.

Marcelo

 

[Timmyjoe]

Congrats on your M6-TTL.

I've had a Black Chrome M6-TTL since not long after they were introduced. It's a fine camera. Not the most exciting, when compared to a Black Paint MP, but functionally just as good. Lusted for an MP for years, but mostly lusted for a 0.85 MP (because my aging eyes would have liked that viewfinder), which means going a la carte, which really jacks up the price.

So I kept the M6-TTL and let go of the 0.85 MP dream. I had DAG do the MP conversion to the viewfinder (to fix viewfinder flare), making it a bit higher contrast and "snappier", and had him put on one of those black "dots". I also obtained a film advance lever from an MP and installed that. Now it feels really good. So except for the 0.85 viewfinder, I have no need for the MP.

Best,
-Tim

 

[presspass]

The only issue I can see with your choice is the shutter speed dial. If you have an M4-2, the shutter speed dial moves in the opposite direction, high to low, to the M6TTL. The 6TTL dial does move in the same direction as the digital Leicas, so that may help in the future. I have had two M6TTLs , a .85 and a .58, since they came out. They have had one CLA each and both work perfectly.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Viewfinder flare.

Cheers,

R.

 

[mpaniagua]

Viewfinder flare.

Cheers,

R.

Good point Roger. That would be huge plus. I seldom has viewfinder flare issues with my M6 and M4-P.


Regards.


Marcelo

 

[roscoetuff]

Yes, VF flare....but fixable with a window change. Plan on a CLA and fix the windows and add a black dot, too. We'll see. I usually like to shoot a roll or two first to see if there are any other issues.

And yes, the MP BP lust doesn't just go away but "abides". But the MP crank revival (M2, M3, M4 style) is an itch I probably won't scratch.

FWIW, you're right that maybe the dial directions will be an issue... but maybe not. I'm not figuring they will be because - while not quite a chameleon, I'm adaptable. With the M4-2, I have to look at the dial anyway, but then tend to set it and forget it. One of the things I love about manual shooting is NOT trying to digitally adapt every exposure to the micro-light variances unless there's an expressive or technical reason. I'm still prone to that, but that's probably a digital hangover (and now possibly counter reaction as well!) given film's touted wider range of forgiveness (tolerance)... sometime suggested as dynamic range.

 

[Archiver]

Congrats on the new camera. The M6 ought to serve you well for as long as you want to shoot film.

As an aside about digital Leicas - why wait for a 36mp sensor when the current sensors are perfectly adequate for most applications? I'm very happy with the 18mp sensor in the M9, and I don't see the upgrade to 36mp as being anything I really want/need.

 

[Leica All Day]

I have been using an M6ttl for around 17 years and I was in the same situation as you were a couple of years ago. I decided that I needed a back up body and at first I got an M3 and M2. As lovely as both of those cameras are, they do not make good back up cameras to an M6ttl, there are just too many little differences. I am more than happy to go out and shoot around Bangkok with just my M3 and a 50mm, but when I go on photo trips, those small differences made some problems for me when I would switch between camera bodies.

Then I ended up getting an M6 classic and once again, the size and direction of the shutter dial slowed me down on the street when using the two bodies ( I know, I know that I should of learned by then). I ended up getting a Black Paint M6ttl Millennium about a year and a half ago, and it is awesome, and if I were pressed to make a complaint, I would say the differences in the rewind would be it. I know it may seem like a small thing, but the older style rewind is a little bit slower (at least for me anyways).

I think I took the "long route" to finally come to where I am today in terms of my gear, but it was a learning process and I don't have any regrets. At least I know now what works for me and what doesn't.

Cheers,
Michael

edit: As far as viewfinder flare goes, I got the windows upgraded by Sherry K. in my original m6ttl and to be honest, I can't tell the difference at all between the two viewfinders, but perhaps others can.

 

[David Hughes]

Congrats on the new camera. The M6 ought to serve you well for as long as you want to shoot film.

As an aside about digital Leicas - why wait for a 36mp sensor when the current sensors are perfectly adequate for most applications? I'm very happy with the 18mp sensor in the M9, and I don't see the upgrade to 36mp as being anything I really want/need.

Hi,

Yes, I read the resolution figures and wondered who would need to print at 5ft by 3ft 4ins. Then I wondered if the lenses most people have would be up to it...

Just my 2d worth.

Regards, David

 

[roscoetuff]

Fair comment. Wallet needs a rest. So does the acquisitive mind. More picture taking, more practice in producing images and less gear. No reason to rush trading out the Sony's... okay maybe one. My other funding source has been selling of my model train collection... and that's made good progress, but still has a ways to go. Digital Leicas will continue to get better in the interim. I'm not "DEMANDING!" or "requiring it"... they just will. All on their own.

While I did succumb in my "digital only" phase to the Sony beast (42mp) and it does take awesome photos, I'll admit that looking back at my Fuji photos (18mp and 24mp for the most part), they're not lacking much at all in sharpness - even in my favorite basement gallery 16 X 20 print size. Fact is, they're almost too sharp! So I won't argue anyone that MP's have to max at some level. I think what I do like is that Leica's M10 shows they can produce a camera that plays to their ergonomic strengths. I came to Leica for the lens size, for film and because I could mostly stick with my familiar Zeiss lenses - which weren't the bank busters I initially thought were the only options. But I'm in no particular rush to switch all the digital gear out. B&H doesn't even show Sony A7RII on their offering list for used gear they're willing to buy yet. It'll happen, but in due course. Let the feedback from earlier adopters guide the way. And when the time comes, it might be a 240 of 262 series anyway. Meantime, I've plenty to do and can let that happen in the background.

At the end of the day, I think one of the appeals of film is that shooting "awesome sharp" photos isn't the ONLY aesthetic but more that sharpness is one tool in a broadly balanced set of tools. And yet we're more often confined by that according to the computer variables in the setup... or the software limits of post-processing. Film, development and printing also have their process limitations, and I think in my learning process, it is helpful going backwards to understand the digital software's objectives as I would suppose the film process is the metaphor from which the engineers worked. And so far, that seems to be a positive.

 

[David Hughes]

FWIW, when I got to 8mp I should have stopped but there we are...

Regards, David

 

[jbtran]

Congrats on your M6-TTL.

I've had a Black Chrome M6-TTL since not long after they were introduced. It's a fine camera. Not the most exciting, when compared to a Black Paint MP, but functionally just as good. Lusted for an MP for years, but mostly lusted for a 0.85 MP (because my aging eyes would have liked that viewfinder), which means going a la carte, which really jacks up the price.

So I kept the M6-TTL and let go of the 0.85 MP dream. I had DAG do the MP conversion to the viewfinder (to fix viewfinder flare), making it a bit higher contrast and "snappier", and had him put on one of those black "dots". I also obtained a film advance lever from an MP and installed that. Now it feels really good. So except for the 0.85 viewfinder, I have no need for the MP.

Best,
-Tim

Won't adding a viewfinder magnifier (e.g. 1.25x) bring it close to your desired 0.85 magnification?

 

[Archiver]

While I did succumb in my "digital only" phase to the Sony beast (42mp) and it does take awesome photos, I'll admit that looking back at my Fuji photos (18mp and 24mp for the most part), they're not lacking much at all in sharpness - even in my favorite basement gallery 16 X 20 print size. Fact is, they're almost too sharp! So I won't argue anyone that MP's have to max at some level. I think what I do like is that Leica's M10 shows they can produce a camera that plays to their ergonomic strengths. I came to Leica for the lens size, for film and because I could mostly stick with my familiar Zeiss lenses - which weren't the bank busters I initially thought were the only options. But I'm in no particular rush to switch all the digital gear out. B&H doesn't even show Sony A7RII on their offering list for used gear they're willing to buy yet. It'll happen, but in due course. Let the feedback from earlier adopters guide the way. And when the time comes, it might be a 240 of 262 series anyway. Meantime, I've plenty to do and can let that happen in the background.

My first DSLR was the Canon 30D, an 8mp camera from 2006. In the last few months, I've been taking it out again and enjoying not only the shooting experience, but the surprisingly good image quality of the raw files. While they don't have the resolution of the 5D Mark II or the biting sharpness of the M9 or Sigma DP2M, they have more than enough 'pleasantness' of colour and tonal variation to be very satisfying. I blinked a few times when I ran some raws through Lightroom and found how good they are, when shot with good lenses. Skin tones are especially good, and the lesser resolution makes for more flattering portraits, too. So the crazy number of megapixels in modern cameras aren't the only important factor in photography, as you say.

Like you, I find Leica's strengths are in compactness and ergonomics, plus the ability to use some very nifty small lenses. Would I have bought a M6 TTL instead of a MP? Yeah. I bought a used M7 as my film M, where a MP would have been significantly more expensive.

 

[leicapixie]

The viewfinder flare has an easy temporary fix!
Piece of exposed blank film, to darken illumination window.
Lose the frames almost totally!
One of the great myths!
I have had it happen only a few times in 17 years.

 

[roscoetuff]

Added a couple of new batteries to the camera and wow! The M6 TTL really takes off. I'm now liking it a whole lot more. FWIW, for me the manual process really is less about having everything the same and more about the process itself. I'm more adaptable I guess than some others. So for me, a back-up camera that's not the same actually offers an opportunity to step-in to a similar, but slightly different shooting experience, and offers a bit of joy of its own. Using the same lenses and using film... on a Leica... that's enough of "the same" to accomplish the goal.

I should add to this that I have found over the last three months that shooting a RF with interchangeable lenses (Leica M in my case) has been extremely enjoyable. I'm completely won over! and I would absolutely love having less stuff - especially less duplication in lenses - and the prospect of going 100% RF with the same lens line-up is EXTREMELY appealing. Not sure this is do-able of course - there are times when long telephoto and macro are necessary or needed and I'm not sure a RF can do these well or servicably enough to substitute for even a mirrorless SLR.... but the thought runs through my brain.

I like being forced to think through exposure and composition, to examine the light, and not wrestle with a menu system or wonder "what my little digital box up to today? What 'mode' did I leave it in?" Nope. I find myself more and more just looking at the light and thinking about capturing how it is playing on the subject. And it's more and more about taking pictures and the joy of having my focus thrust into creativity and less into "messing with tech". Maybe that's simply running up the experience curve? or maybe that's part of a RF or a Leica M, or film... it's difficult to unpack that. What I can say is that I'm learning and shooting almost every day, and in a reasonable period, expect this "jump" will become more and more natural; less and less impeded by my limited experience with the mechanics; and yield to making captures of interest to more than just myself.

But I also love the film tech that I've been forced to learn and I really, really enjoy taking my manual shooting experience... which pushed me into 100% manual lenses and then a camera to run them... and ultimately film... and now with film, down to this physical, chemical level of detail. It's the push into a detailed image making process that's not electronic running according to someone else's process but something I do with my hands in processes I've chosen that enables a slew of different results depending on the choices I make. This forces a learning process that works back towards the creative process, and it's fun as it extends to the eyes and seeing not just what's before you and your camera, but looking into images others have made and thinking through the choices they've made, too.

The fact is... the thought occurs to me that if I thought I could dump all my Sony and go all in for Leica - including a digital Leica, I'd be inclined to follow that path. I'm not there yet. But yes, I think more of this every day. What keeps me from going all-in with Leica is more than just another opportunity to burn cash... seems to me I've done that with the best of them so far. No, what keeps me from throwing in my lot hook line and sinker are 2 things: Macro (I've a sweet 100mm that is perfect for taking eBay pictures among other things generate $'s) and the other is longer glass. With longer glass, I've got a 135mm that's the sharpest thing on the planet.. a bit heavy, but sharp as they come. I've got longer, but that's even less commonly used. And everything I can see suggests that even the 135mm 2.8 "with goggles" is hard to focus on a Leica M. Maybe digital with an EVF gets it done? Maybe not.

If I could see a prospective fix to these things... I'd work to trade everything and go all in for a digital M or SL or something for those times when you want to run the same glass on a digi-box.

 

[MCTuomey]

RFs are limited by design (but admittedly, for some, a great pleasure in use and ownership). If you can work within or around those limits (focal lengths, manual focus, etc.), and RF simplicity is truly and practically beneficial for you, by all means consolidate. Less can be more, especially when the gear is so familiar it becomes just an extension of your shooting eye/mind.

Some prefer RFs enough to forego the kinds of shooting that doesn't favor them. Some find the best tool for the shooting they do, regardless of camera type. It's helpful to know with some certainty which side you favor.

My thoughts, anyway. Enough said.

Just be sure you don't waste time and money doing so only to find you need your A7RII+Zeiss for really large printing or high rez worthy subjects like architecture or landscapes or long exposures or for event work where AF and zooms are necessary - whatever kind of shooting where RFs don't fare so well comparatively.

 

[Rob-F]

I use a 0.58 finder most of the time, so my MP has the 0.58 finder. I use an M6 0.72 when I want that magnification. To make it more similar to the MP, DAG installed the MP finder in my M6, and also swapped the M6 winding lever for an MP/M2/M3 style. There is little functional difference!

 

[Timmyjoe]

Won't adding a viewfinder magnifier (e.g. 1.25x) bring it close to your desired 0.85 magnification?

Yes, but I find, with the way I use the camera, slipping it in and out of a bag over my shoulder, the viewfinder magnifier sticking out the back side of the camera gets hung up and I fear eventually I would break it off.

Best,
-Tim

 

[Huss]

Yes, but I find, with the way I use the camera, slipping it in and out of a bag over my shoulder, the viewfinder magnifier sticking out the back side of the camera gets hung up and I fear eventually I would break it off.

Best,
-Tim

That magnifier also pokes u in the eye, or knocks your glasses.

My Leica 1.4x gathers dust in my bag..