Most Maligned Leica M Model

Most Maligned Leica M Model

  • M3

    Votes: 11 1.8%

  • M2

    Votes: 3 0.5%

  • M4

    Votes: 3 0.5%

  • M4-2

    Votes: 65 10.5%

  • M4-P

    Votes: 15 2.4%

  • M5

    Votes: 303 48.9%

  • M6

    Votes: 7 1.1%

  • M6 TTL

    Votes: 12 1.9%

  • M7

    Votes: 20 3.2%

  • MP (new and original)

    Votes: 11 1.8%

  • M8

    Votes: 146 23.6%

  • M9

    Votes: 23 3.7%
  • Total voters
    619
The M5 might be a great camera by itself.
But it seems to depart to much from what makes an M an M.
I personally love the M (not 5) size, and the location of the finder, at the far left.
I can stick the camera on my big nose and have the finder right in place.
On an M5, a cron 35 of the same era feels too small to me.
In terms of handing, the Hexar AF is closer than the M5 to the other Ms.
That being said, I perfectly understand why people love their M5.
Some great things there, like the speed dial, or the needle match meter...
Personally, the best M is to be invented: an MP with the larger frames of older models (was it so hard to make it an A LA CARTE option??:bang🙂

I voted M3, just because I really can't live without 35mm frames. Even the M5 has them🙄
 
Last edited:
I can't live without the 35mm frames either. My Summilux permanently stays on the M7, which is my favourite camera. Love its ease of use. The AE is useful and despite my initial scepticism find it quite accurate most of the time, its even more predictable than the Nikon Matrix metering which can give very unpredictable results.
 
Before I bough my first Leica, I read widely about the various models and the one least liked was the M4-2. It's steel gears were said to lack the smoothness of brass gears in the M4 before it, but the M4-P after it was in contrast well liked. The M5 was definitely an oddity, disliked by some for its departure in style but generally well liked by its owners.

There's no doubt that the passionate discussion of Leica gear drew me to the make, but ultimately convinced me that the differences were largely user preferences and any one would be great.

Steve
 
I've often wondered why the M2 is the cheapest Leica on the used market.

Regarding the M5, I do like my RFs smaller than my SLRs 🙂
 
I'm tempted to say that the M4-2 is the most maligned model, due to the traditionalists view of the M4-2's "cheapened" build quality due to its steel internal mechanisms and the fact that it was produced in Midlands, but arguably it's also one of, if not, THE most significant and important Leica M models ever built as well.
 
I've read so many negative posts about the M4-2 that, when it comes to the most maligned (according to Roger's definition), this one takes the cake. The M5 was simply too weird, too different, too radically new for the Leica users of 1971, who also maligned it and now regret it (hopefully). However, the M4-2 is still being considered a "dog" by those for whom the M4 and the M2 were the Holy Grail of Leicadom.

Hence, my vote went for the M4-2.

BTW, you guys know I have one, and it's my favorite non-metered body! 🙂
 
I think that until they can shoot video with autofocus at a burst rate of 24 fps, all Leica M models are very much maligned.

It still won't answer the Holy Grail of Photo Questions: "which lens is sharper"?

Oh, the humanity.
 
Now, I only own one M..an M5 😀,
But I voted M8: Because for Leica to "Space" on the IR sensor filter was worse than new body style the M5 had. The M5, after 134xxxx at least, was very solid camera that preformed as any M. Were was the QC on the sensor assembly? How could that happen?

Every M has it's Pro's and Cons. The M5 Con...the size of the rewind finger hold.. I would have made it wider and longer, for a better grip. My fat fingers do slip off it more than I would like.
M5 Pro...The Excellent Light meter. In tricky lighting, you can always control what gets metered.

I think the other Ms (M2/3/4) have similar bodies with small differences. The M6/TTL/M7 are similar, and have small differences..But, just enough to have a choice of feature sets that reflects your style/wants. Most of the modern Ms have had more QC issues too. But, the Cameras are still very high on Build and durability despite this.
 
Today was filled with shooting. I was out 3 times, once with an M3, then an M9, and finally with an M5. Different lenses and desired image qualities decided which was used. I did some close imaging with a 50 DR and eyes with the M3, wide angle (21mm) color work with the M9 (film is all B&W for me), and general 35mm shooting with the M5. The fact is I love working with all of them (and an M7) but the M5 might be my favorite for the actual shooting experience, it's handling. I like it's size, I like hanging it vertically on my side using the 2 lugs (I have a 3 lug body), and I love the meter. The analogue feedback creates an organic connection with the light, that's how it seems. EV adjustment becomes a bit more a matter of "feel", less a digital instruction, as it is on the M7, M9, etc I love seeing the shutter speed always in the VF. Just a great camera. best...Peter
 
I voted M8, not because I've owned one, but because I've never wanted one. The crop factor is intolerable. And it's already obsolete!
 
Most maligned M body is definitely the M4-2, but the most disliked for feel is the M5. I don't know why that is, but the supposed changes to plastic or metal gears of the M4-2 doesn't make it function any less than what a Leica M should. Mine's been working for ages (but the flash sync inside is another story; fixed twice). The changes in what a Leica M should feel like all points to the M5, but that too was a great working Leica.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom