M6TTL... right choice?

Weird question. Would an M4p sound like it fits my wants better in the long run? Or even an M3?
 
Depends-Do you like internal metering (Mp or M6) or would you prefer a handheld meter or none? The other differences are marginal. No 35 mm frame on the M3.
 
Last edited:
My number one goal is all weather survivability. I already own a waterproof meter... though a snap on would be ok for other needs. I also was never going to by a flash, my 2 flasheshs I normally use have an auto mode.

Dependability in as many enviroments as possible is the big thing here for me.

I would grab a Contax S2... but they are so hard to find, I figure the Leica is simpler and safer to get.
 
Okay, here is one from "left Field".

If you want overall weather-survivability and interchangeable lenses, and Mechanical operation, and Viewfinder operation, How about a Nikonos III?

It is "scale" focus, but you can always get a rangefinder for the accessory shoe. It is great for gloved operation. It will certainly be weatherproof.
 
he Nikonos is a neat idea... but would end up sitting on a shelf. But kinda neat idea. At the moment, I seem to be trying to decide on a model of M, I think. Wearing glasses, and wanting to use it all... and wanting the camera to survive...

A bit much for this late:)
 
An M4-P wouldn't offer any advantages except some up-front cost savings. The M6 "classic" is basically the same camera with the addition of the TTL meter (not TTL flash).

Your questions got me wondering about M2s, but they seem to trade at prices approaching or even surpassing newer cameras. If you send me an email directly, I'll send you a copy of an article by Roy Moss from the LHSA _Viewfinder_ on why the M2 is the best Leica ever made.
 
I don't know that any M is more weather resistant than another. They are all made to professional standards, but not the same as a Nikon F5 or Canon EOS 1v. By going with a meterless body you are eliminating any electronics that can go bad from exposure to weather. Being a mechanical tool, at worst it would simply need to be thawed or dried if something bad were to happen.
 
That was more or less it. I fugure I could have a snap on meter and the primary meter (which would come on a major trip regardless). So, if all all fails, having to dry out a camera is better than getting a camera stuck in a shop.

I was also thinking the .72 mag, just so I can use a darn 35mm as well, while wearing glasses. I was figuring, for when using fast lenses, bring a Viewing Magnifier M 1.25x, and use it. If it gets lost, I can still shoot:)
 
A .85 camera doesn't work well for 35's. It's good for 50's and up, so if you decide to get one try to get a .72 or .58 as a second or backup. You seem to like the 35 focal length, so you should try to get a body that works well with that focal length. They aren't really water resistant, but don't seem to mind a reasonable amount of moisture either. For extreme climates, there are better cameras if that's a prime criterium. I've used Leicas in -40 to +115, and some work well in very cold weather and others started freezing up. When I was in a cold climate, I also had Konica Autoreflex cameras, and they kept on working better in very cold weather. Even the meter worked.

I've shot penguins in the wild in South Africa and in the Galapagos, and long teles weren't always necessary. In both cases my main cameras were Leica M's, with an SLR and long lenses available. Most of my penguin shots were with the Leicas. I also tried to get some underwater shots with the SLR in an Ewa-marine in the Galapagos, but those things are FAST underwater! and I got nothing useable. I would love to have some more chances like that, though.

Henning
 
That the long teles may not always be necessary is something that is great to here.

I am strongly leaning towards an M4P. For $900 US you can buy q beutiful version, so for 300 MORE I can have a primary and backup... very intriguing. It also has no electronics to fail.

Thoughts?
 
NoTx said:
Even better:)

How well does it work?
Click to expand...

Very,very well. I use it from 50 mm upwards and it really makes a difference. I often forget to take it off for 35 or even 28. I'm thinking of leaving it on permanently and getting a 28 mm finder......
 
If you wear glasses 0.58 is the most comfortable magnification with 35mm, that's what I use. I did a test with the 0.72 and I could see full frame starting 50mm only.
Without glasses, 0.72 is fine for 35mm, but 0.58 is better for 28mm and 0.85 for 50mm and above. Anyway the effective baselength of the 0.58 is good enough to focus Summilux 50mm/1.4 and 0.85 is required for Noctilux, Summilux 75mm and 135mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom