Most "Leica-like" SLR?

When the OM series came out, it was compared to the Leica M system in size. It was and probably still is the only SLR, maybe the Pentax MX and ME as well (though the lenses focus in the opposite direction), that is very M-like. It also compliments the M system quite nicely.

Minolta and Leitz did share a pretty close working relationship in the 70s and early 80s. There were a couple of Leica R lenses that were produced by Minolta. The 16mm full frame fish-eye was one. The R series was influenced by the Minolta SLRs at the time, and don't forget the Leitz/Minolta CL! It was my first "Leica" back in 1977.
 
IMHO the closest SLR to a Leica-M is the Canon Ae-1 ,Ae-1P series. All controls turn in same direction as Leica. Lenses focus same direction. I received the AE-!p as a gift. some years ago. There is no thinking what and which direction to go! The lenses have a similar signature to Leitz/Leica lenses of same period.(70's to 80's). I personally think from my usage, they may in fact be superior in contrast, sharpness and way less flare issues.
The camera body is small. Compare sizes. My Pentax MX and ME were way too small even for my hands! The Canon is perfect. The screen is super bright and easy to focus on. The Canon range is also reliable. They are very inexpensive now. Care about lenses which are FD or FL.
Nikon F is a great box. Simply destruct proof. The speed dial, the lens focusing and the fitting and removal of lenses in bayonet all CONTRARY to Leica. The old joke! Can one use a Leica and a Nikon together. Yes! If one stops working, you have always got the Nikon-F.
My Leica is my most serviced camera. Yet it is special. That special feel is probably best served by the Canon AE-1Program.
 
Last edited:
Another vote for the OM-1. I have had them for 38 years and my Leica M for only 2 years but they complement each other very well. The OM-1 body is a bit shorter and smaller except for the prism peak and mirror box but the feel in the hands is just right for me.

I also have a Pen F and the only time I've had a passerby ask "Is that a Leica?" is when using the Pen F. Sometimes half frame is hard to explain to people. I almost want to carry a sample negative from 35mm full frame and half frame. It would be easier to show than to tell.
 
Pentax LX, indubitably

Pentax LX, indubitably

front4.jpg
 
Ignore all other answers. As always, I have the one true correct answer. The answer to your question is the Miranda.

4108520955_a7d37cffac_z.jpg
 
I'll cast a vote for the Pentax SV. Of all the Nikon, Minolta, Olympus, and Leica SLR's I've tried, the SV is most like the M3. No electronics to worry about, super smooth film winder, hefty but svelte brass body, beautiful uncluttered viewfinder. And Takumars that produce some truly lovely images.
 
My vote goes to the Leicaflex SL. The large central coarse microprism focusing aid gives the best confirmation of any SLR I've ever tried and comes the closest to giving the confidence of an M camera. This is partly due to the fact that with the split image aid in the SL2 (as well as many other camera brands), the prism wedge slope is set for f/4 or f/4.5. It prevents prism blackout in slower lenses but reduces focusing accuracy due to a reduced effective base length. However, the SL's microprism's slope is set for f/2.8 resulting in greater focusing accuracy because most of the limited availability of lenses at that time were f/2.8 or f/2. Mechanically, the SL/SL2 are Leica all the way and the shutter release/mirror dampening ensure steady shooting.

Physically, the size and quietness of the OM is the obvious correct choice, but based on the qualities you said you "really wanted", the Leicaflex series fits the bill better than anything I can think of.
 
NLewis said:
..... I'm interested in a classic manual-focus SLR system that feels more like a Leica M....
Click to expand...

Size: I think OM series, also their lenses are more compact compared to the rest.

Ruggedness, reliability: The original Nikon F.
 
If you're talking about mechanical smoothness and feel then the OMs and SVs are nowhere near as smooth as an M. I'd say the Leicaflexes and R6, or Nikon F/F2, or Pentax LX are pretty close in smoothness of operation, or how about the Contarexes? If you're looking for some of the feel with the small size then the OM1 and Pentax S series (S1a/S3/SV etc) are good comparisons and the pentax lenses are pretty small. Or how about a well serviced Zenit 3 or 3M?
 
i figure "leica-like' is a matter of handling, of bring-along-ability. i've had an m-3 and a barnack, and several types of slrs. in handling, it's gotta be an om-1, or om-1n. i've got an f2a. just too big and heavy to tote every where. and i'm speaking as a hobbyist only ...
 
Now I think everybody has suggested their favourite SLRs and all that is left is to suggest the T90.
 
Having re read your original post I'd say R6 or R6.2 as the Leicaflex's will probably be too big for you.
Many are suggesting OM's. The only comparible feature is it's size. Very capable and durable cameras however they feel awfull and cheap compaired to old school cameras.
Nikon F and F2 are nice but out on size.
The R6 series feels basically like an M6 with a mirror.
I use Leicaflex SL and SL2 only because they are the best for manual focus. If my sight was better I would use R6's for the size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom