robbo
Robbo
Oh dear! I've started quite a debate. Sorry! Still, it's given me plenty to think about. I can't see me shooting much if anything with flash, so I don't suppose the battery issue is so important to me. My preference, if only slight, for the TTL at the moment ,is merely based on the age of the camera as I intend this to be a very long-term ownership.
Dralowid
Michael
'Oh dear! I've started quite a debate.'
Don't worry Robbo, it is not a new debate by any means. I have chrome TTL that has functioned faultlessly from new and has been dropped a couple of times. It also seems to be fairly resistant to salt water!
The TTL seems to upset the purists but it has plenty to offer.
I'd suggest the slight difference in price is justified by the slightly newer camera.
Also I suspect that most TTLs have not been used for commercial work (talk about a wild generalisation)...
You will not be disappointed.
Michael
Don't worry Robbo, it is not a new debate by any means. I have chrome TTL that has functioned faultlessly from new and has been dropped a couple of times. It also seems to be fairly resistant to salt water!
The TTL seems to upset the purists but it has plenty to offer.
I'd suggest the slight difference in price is justified by the slightly newer camera.
Also I suspect that most TTLs have not been used for commercial work (talk about a wild generalisation)...
You will not be disappointed.
Michael
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
robbo, here's a contrarian advice. I also have an M4-P. But I won't spend another dime to move to M6 because the only thing the M6 has is a meter, which is an electrical component, one more to break. You mentioned long term use, your M4-P is perfect for that.
It doesn't sound like you're a newbie, you can easily decouple yourself from meter if you want to
And use the available fund to get another glass, or filters, or ... film
Anyways, just another route that you may consider.
It doesn't sound like you're a newbie, you can easily decouple yourself from meter if you want to
And use the available fund to get another glass, or filters, or ... film
Anyways, just another route that you may consider.
nobbylon
Veteran
i would go and take a look at both the m6 and the ttl side by side, I know its only a couple of mm's but the m6 seems a lot smaller to me. i have both and i must say i prefer the M6 but thats just a personal thing. in use they feel the same apart from the shutter dial being easier to change on the ttl. both great cameras, good luck finding a good one, try and buy one from here i'd say and you should get a nice one.
Richard Marks
Rexel
There is a problem with flare of the rangefinder patch with the M6. Its not horendous by any means, but I think the rangefinder patch is better on later M6TTL's. Its even better on the MP (have you looked at this?).
best wishes
Richard Marks
best wishes
Richard Marks
ferider
Veteran
I would second Will's comment. Keep the M4P, and spend the money towards
lenses or another body, like an M3 or M2, for instance. I find M4P and
M6 not so different, and if you have a very early M4p, the finder might
actually be better than the M6 finder, and your M4P's alignment might
be easier to fix.
Best,
Roland.
lenses or another body, like an M3 or M2, for instance. I find M4P and
M6 not so different, and if you have a very early M4p, the finder might
actually be better than the M6 finder, and your M4P's alignment might
be easier to fix.
Best,
Roland.
JNewell
Leica M Recidivist
Richard Marks said:
The flare potential is either there or not...it is there in all M4-Ps, all M6 classics, nearly all M4-2s, and either all or almost all M6TTLs, as well as (IIRC) most M7s - unless the camera in question has been retrofitted with the missing condenser. The MP benefits additionally by having AR-coated finder surfaces, which I don't believe (could be wrong) ever made it into the M6TTL or M7.
Other than TTL flash, there is not a lot to separate an M6 from an M6TTL, other than the extra height of the M6TTL and the opposite-way shutter speed dial. If you are a longstanding M user, these may drive you nuts. If not, you probably won't notice the extra height and the opposite-way (and larger) shutter speed dial will make a ton of sense to you.
I agree with Roland and others - try to keep the P and save to add another body (in which case, for simplicity, I'd definitely get an M6 classic instead of the TTL, if only because the shutter speed dial difference may drive you nuts and/or cost you pictures when you're pressed).
robbo
Robbo
Thanks again everyone. I really appreciate the even-handed advice you've given. I'm still undecided, but my initial concern remains, that in busy situations, juggling the camera and separate exposure meter creates extra pressure and missed shots. Perhaps I've become too meter-dependent after years of Nikon Fs and Ds and will regain my confidence in my own 'inbuilt meter' if I stick with the M4-P. I have the lenses I need - 35 'cron ASPH, 50 Planar, 90 'cron - at the moment and could only see me going for a 28 as an indulgence.
I don't think I want to add extra bodies as I've just made myself clear out cameras that I can't remember using in the last year or two and it would seem bizarre to start adding more. I guess I'll go for the newest M with a meter that I can afford. That way, I can have the best of both worlds as I will still have my sekonic as back-up
I don't think I want to add extra bodies as I've just made myself clear out cameras that I can't remember using in the last year or two and it would seem bizarre to start adding more. I guess I'll go for the newest M with a meter that I can afford. That way, I can have the best of both worlds as I will still have my sekonic as back-up
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
OK, I stand corrected. I was under the impression that it worked anyway, except for the TTL exposure control.EmilGil said:
Then again, if you carry a flash, carrying a spare battery for the M6TTL won't be a large problem in practice; the problem would be user forgetfulness more than anything else (in my case anyway
)Philipp
Krosya
Konicaze
As far as built-in meter - well, it's nice to have it, but if you shoot print film - exact metering in most situations is not that significant. If you shoot slides - it may be a good idea to get a camera with built-in meter. As to TTL or not, I'd repeat someone's advice and say - let price decide, go with whichever is a better deal, that is of course if you decide to buy M6 after all. Nice camera - yes, better than what you already have - only you can tell.
After all M6 classic was good enough for Jennifer Connelly in Blood diamond film Maybe this lil fact will tip the scales for you.
After all M6 classic was good enough for Jennifer Connelly in Blood diamond film
Maybe this lil fact will tip the scales for you. robbo
Robbo
Wel,. I've done the deed! After a few minutes at the dealer's I'd made my mind up as far as TTL was concerned. What an easy camera to use! The shutter speed dial is excellent, so it was just a matter of the usual checks and talk about money. In the end I came away a happy bunny. Perhaps one of you can tell me what year it is, the serial number starts 2757, so is that about 2001?
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
robbo said:
2001 (possibly 2002) is about right. That number would place it towards the end of the M6TTL's production. The very last group of M6TTLs had brass topcovers - there are subtle ways to tell if this is the case with yours.
robbo
Robbo
Thanks Bill.
Well, I've just got my first roll thro' the TTL and what a relief to find I'd made a good choice. It's just so easy to use that you can just concentrate on composition and getting the right moment. If I get a chance, I'll upload some sample shots.
Thanks again one and all for your advice.
Well, I've just got my first roll thro' the TTL and what a relief to find I'd made a good choice. It's just so easy to use that you can just concentrate on composition and getting the right moment. If I get a chance, I'll upload some sample shots.
Thanks again one and all for your advice.
