bennybo
Member
I've done some searching of the archives and am trying not to do another "Which body should I get" post.
So anyway, which body should I get?
I am interested in getting back into B&W photography and would like to do it with a Leica. I've never used a rangefinder before, having mainly used Canon EOS (630 for film and 10D for digital). I am very attracted to the simplicity of the rangefinder and the quality lenses. Also the size. I find I don't lug the big SLRs around, and therefore don't shoot as much as I'd like.
A manual rangefinder will make me think much more about exposure and composition. And I hope make me a better photographer.
With the SLRs I rarely went fully manual, partly due to laziness and partly due to the fact that they are a PITA to use fully manual.
Metering will be important at the beginning. And that leads me to the experts who have used the various Leicas.... Let's leave money out of it for now - and hey, I want a Leica... I would like to be able to use a 35mm lens so that puts me with the M2, M4 or M6 (without going to the big money of an MP). The internal meter of the M6 is attractive to me (albeit without having used one), but I would like to ask the experts whether a VC meter on an M2 or an M4 would be easier for a beginner? Not having to adjust the aperature and shutter speed while I'm looking through the viewfinder and all. I guess if the answer goes that way it opens up the screw mount Leicas as well. I realize the correct answer is to go out and try them all but that may prove difficult to find. But at least I'd like to narrow down my choices.
Comments? I hope this makes sense...
So anyway, which body should I get?
I am interested in getting back into B&W photography and would like to do it with a Leica. I've never used a rangefinder before, having mainly used Canon EOS (630 for film and 10D for digital). I am very attracted to the simplicity of the rangefinder and the quality lenses. Also the size. I find I don't lug the big SLRs around, and therefore don't shoot as much as I'd like.
A manual rangefinder will make me think much more about exposure and composition. And I hope make me a better photographer.
With the SLRs I rarely went fully manual, partly due to laziness and partly due to the fact that they are a PITA to use fully manual.
Metering will be important at the beginning. And that leads me to the experts who have used the various Leicas.... Let's leave money out of it for now - and hey, I want a Leica... I would like to be able to use a 35mm lens so that puts me with the M2, M4 or M6 (without going to the big money of an MP). The internal meter of the M6 is attractive to me (albeit without having used one), but I would like to ask the experts whether a VC meter on an M2 or an M4 would be easier for a beginner? Not having to adjust the aperature and shutter speed while I'm looking through the viewfinder and all. I guess if the answer goes that way it opens up the screw mount Leicas as well. I realize the correct answer is to go out and try them all but that may prove difficult to find. But at least I'd like to narrow down my choices.
Comments? I hope this makes sense...
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
I went through the same thing and ended up with a Voigtlander R3A because it saved me a lot of money, the lenses are great, and it does atuomatic exposure.
aizan
Veteran
built-in meter for sure. takes up zero space and it's always with you.
GeneW
Veteran
Let me make a suggestion. On your next few photoshoots, especially outdoor ones, take one of your existing cameras and turn the meter off, or don't use it, the entire time. Estimate the light (use a cheat sheet for EV values if Sunny-16 doesn't apply).bennybo said:
It can be an uncomfortable exercise at first, but you may find you quickly develop a good sense for lighting conditions. If so, and you can operate fairly comfortably meterless, you'll have fewer restrictions on what kind of RF body to get.
I've owned a Bessa R, Bessa R2, a couple of Zorkis with no meters, and now a Leica M2 with no meter. I have a VC clipon meter that I normally carry in my pocket, rather than on the camera, because I find metering every shot gets in the way of my shooting. Others like to meter every frame. It's a personal choice, but I don't find using an external meter slows me down, and there's something really special about shooting with an M2 or M3, IMO.
Gene
Avotius
Some guy
I am in sorta the same hole as you, im really really really really tempted by a Leica M6ttl (ttl because of the larger shutter speed dial for me, who cares about the flash thing...). I like the idea of full manual and feel that my photography has got really lazy with SLR and all those "we do it for you" toys. But at the same time I like that new Zeiss Ikon rangefinder camera, it has the manual buzz but it also has some auto functions for when I want them......sigh...a hard choice, used leica or new zeiss, same price range for me...
for you I would go with the M6 or the M6ttl. Built in meter, etc etc, you really cant go wrong with that I think.
for you I would go with the M6 or the M6ttl. Built in meter, etc etc, you really cant go wrong with that I think.
Stu W
Well-known
I too went from SLR to rangefinder. I went through my buying craze, bought every lens and accesory in sight, but I found photography to be a burden carrying all that equipment. I now carry an M3 with a 50mm, a VC meter on top, and 2 spare film cases on the camera strap. The VC meter fits under the top of the eveready case so I dont need a camera bag to protect my equipment. Stu
M
merciful
Guest
I would like to be able to use a 35mm lens so that puts me with the M2, M4 or M6 (without going to the big money of an MP). [/QUOTE]
Or an M5, with its cool match-needle meter.
Or an M5, with its cool match-needle meter.
Last edited by a moderator:
JonB
Member
I'm going to suggest that you stay away from an in-camera meter. It sounds as though you want this camera to be more of an educational tool than a productive workhorse; that you're willing to take the time to adjust to a new style of capturing images; and, I'm guessing here, that you're willing to risk making significant errors in some frames in order to get to where you're going. You've also indicated that you have succumbed to the wiles of automation before. My concern is that, with a built-in meter, you might be tempted to just look at the meter and twist the rings to make the meter happy, rather than basing your exposure on the light and your subject. (I know that is true for me, at any rate.) I find it slightly disconcerting to take pictures that my camera is telling me will be over- or under-exposed, even though I know I'm intelligently compensating for my subject, and so, until I'm quite confident in my ability to properly expose frames, I doubt I'll be using a camera with built-in metering for anything but fully-automatic exposure. It will take more time and may lead to unusable frames, but will also provide better feedback--and therefore better education--for you as a photographer.
But then, I'm only just starting down this path, so my reasoning is based more on hope and expectation than wisdom and experience. Grain of salt (the big kind they use on the roads), etc. Cheers!
But then, I'm only just starting down this path, so my reasoning is based more on hope and expectation than wisdom and experience. Grain of salt (the big kind they use on the roads), etc. Cheers!
FrankS
Registered User
There was a thread a while back called "chasing the needle" or "chasing the (meter) needle" that you may find useful.
aad
Not so new now.
I suggest not worrying about in-camera metering, myself. The above suggestion about going meterless with a cheat sheet is a great one, and you can also take a quick reading at the start of say, a walk down the street and just shoot.
peterc
Heretic
Unless you're shooting slide (and you say your interest is B&W) or very slow black and white film, metering isn't much of an issue. As Gene said, Sunny-16 and cheat sheets are more than adequate.
After a few rolls, your brain will be your meter.
Peter
After a few rolls, your brain will be your meter.
Peter
sixb
Member
Personally, I would opt for an M6 “classic”. Meter aside, Its rapid film loading/winding is, for me, its biggest selling point. Also, the internal meter is easy to ignore if you want to ignore it- and, if need be, you could remove the battery/s and go meterless -I also think the internal meter to be a great learning tool when checking it against your pre-metered exposure.
-just my 2 cents-
Chris
-just my 2 cents-
Chris
MCTuomey
Veteran
I can't add much to what's been said, so I'll offer my limited experience. I came to RFs for the same reason you mention - simplicity. Fortune smiled and I have an M4 and a Bessa R2A. Short transition to trusting my own use of sunny and snowy 16, and I reach for the M4 far more than the Bessa. It is one of those genuinely delightful experiences we owe to ourselves to shoot a fine mechanical RF. The "flow" of taking pictures this way is very sweet, indeed, like dancing versus marching.
If you really want to have the meter and feel the pull of Leica, get an M5 or M6 --- and leave the meter off when you're comfortable to do so. It won't take long.
If you really want to have the meter and feel the pull of Leica, get an M5 or M6 --- and leave the meter off when you're comfortable to do so. It won't take long.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Hey Benny, welcome.
First of all, I must applaud you for having searched the threads before posting a question. You have no idea how many times people just post something that has been asked over and over, and it's really a matter of finding the thread and "bumping" it with your own related question.
That said ... I think you may want to try out a Bessa-R; I think that it's a cheap, not bad way at all to get into rangefinders considering you want a built-in light meter. The lenses available for it, "LTM" mount, are *generally* cheaper than the M-mount lenses. Loading the film won't be foreign to you having used the 630 (btw, that was my first SLR, it's a nice body, but it's a heavy piece of metal and the meter LED is an awful design, but you'll practically won't see much of a difference using a Bessa-R for under- and over-exposure readings).
Good luck!
First of all, I must applaud you for having searched the threads before posting a question. You have no idea how many times people just post something that has been asked over and over, and it's really a matter of finding the thread and "bumping" it with your own related question.
That said ... I think you may want to try out a Bessa-R; I think that it's a cheap, not bad way at all to get into rangefinders considering you want a built-in light meter. The lenses available for it, "LTM" mount, are *generally* cheaper than the M-mount lenses. Loading the film won't be foreign to you having used the 630 (btw, that was my first SLR, it's a nice body, but it's a heavy piece of metal and the meter LED is an awful design, but you'll practically won't see much of a difference using a Bessa-R for under- and over-exposure readings).
Good luck!
Finder
Veteran
I have been using a handheld meter for as long as I can remember, even with cameras with built-in meters. It is simple and quick to use. Personally, I like to use a Gossen Luna Pro SBC with a 5/10 degree spot attachment. It comes of easily so I can use it as a 30 degree reflection meter or an incident meter.
I do use the sunny 16 rule and have certain exposures remembered for specific conditions, but the meter can be used to check you are not being fooled. In any given scene, you usually only need to meter once until the light changes.
One thing I noticed about using a handheld meter when I was getting started, my exposure were more consistant. When I was using the camera meter, I would always get a few over and underexposed images on a roll. I still find separate meters simpler. Once I have the exposure dialed into the camera, I can just focus on taking pictures and not worry about those blinking lights in the viewfinder.
I do use the sunny 16 rule and have certain exposures remembered for specific conditions, but the meter can be used to check you are not being fooled. In any given scene, you usually only need to meter once until the light changes.
One thing I noticed about using a handheld meter when I was getting started, my exposure were more consistant. When I was using the camera meter, I would always get a few over and underexposed images on a roll. I still find separate meters simpler. Once I have the exposure dialed into the camera, I can just focus on taking pictures and not worry about those blinking lights in the viewfinder.
bennybo
Member
I appreciate the posts and the comments.
The thread by FrankS was a very interesting read indeed.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11120
I think it should be bumped every month or two just to keep the discussion flowing.
Probably the biggest message I can take away is to learn to gauge the light with minimal metering and then just concentrate on shooting. I'm likely to look for an M6 in chrome (am I vain?) more for the modern loading and rewinding than the built in meter. A nice 50 mm Summicron followed by a 35mm seems like a reasonable way to go. If I thought the body decision is tough, the lens one is even more fraught with fact and myth...
Watch for a WTB (and I'll prowl ebay for a good deal). Did they make a lot more M6s is black or do they just come up more often?
The thread by FrankS was a very interesting read indeed.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11120
I think it should be bumped every month or two just to keep the discussion flowing.
Probably the biggest message I can take away is to learn to gauge the light with minimal metering and then just concentrate on shooting. I'm likely to look for an M6 in chrome (am I vain?) more for the modern loading and rewinding than the built in meter. A nice 50 mm Summicron followed by a 35mm seems like a reasonable way to go. If I thought the body decision is tough, the lens one is even more fraught with fact and myth...
Watch for a WTB (and I'll prowl ebay for a good deal). Did they make a lot more M6s is black or do they just come up more often?
MCTuomey
Veteran
Benny, it's not vanity, it's your preference. The black versions run a bit less, probably because there's more of them. "Modern" loading commenced with the M4 though, I believe (the actual film-loading thing is overblown - its where to stow the baseplate that's the challenge ;-))).
Best of luck!
Best of luck!