ERV
Well-known
Having a quieter camera shutter is important to me and the Bessa body that I had for a while was too loud for my taste.
I eventually traded up to an M6 which is much more discreet.
A small piece of gaffers tape will take care of the lettering and red dot, if you are concerned about it.
A very inexpensive lens option is the 40mm Summicron C, which is excellent.
I have one as my everyday walk-around lens and it is easy to approximate the 40mm frameline on the M6. They cost $300-400.
As for 35mm, you could look for a V3 Summicron, which is a great lens at a reasonable price. There was one in the classifieds for 750.
If you really want a 50mm, another option is the 50mm Elmar-M 2.8 which you can find for around $500 and is an excellent compact lens as well.
I've had other 50mm lenses and it is the one that I've kept.
My very first Leica combination after a Bessa and CV 35 was an M6 and 40mm lens. I was hooked and its been downhill financially since then.
I eventually traded up to an M6 which is much more discreet.
A small piece of gaffers tape will take care of the lettering and red dot, if you are concerned about it.
A very inexpensive lens option is the 40mm Summicron C, which is excellent.
I have one as my everyday walk-around lens and it is easy to approximate the 40mm frameline on the M6. They cost $300-400.
As for 35mm, you could look for a V3 Summicron, which is a great lens at a reasonable price. There was one in the classifieds for 750.
If you really want a 50mm, another option is the 50mm Elmar-M 2.8 which you can find for around $500 and is an excellent compact lens as well.
I've had other 50mm lenses and it is the one that I've kept.
My very first Leica combination after a Bessa and CV 35 was an M6 and 40mm lens. I was hooked and its been downhill financially since then.
januaryman
"Flim? You want flim?"
I have one from a friend, 2 from Heavystar on ebay, one from Americaneagle on ebay and only one was troublesome - it would not lock. I sent it back and it was replaced with a gift added for my inconvenience. One has sharp edges, but the others look and perform just fine. Or just spend more at Cameraquest if quality issues bother you. They are wonderful, I hear.
kevin m
Veteran
It's hard to find a bad lens in M-mount, spend your money on the body. The M finder is much better than the Bessas, it's quiter, more solid and infinitely and eternally repairable. Get an M6 and be done with it.
snip
Established
As much as I agree with you that the Leica is more solid and infinitely and eternally repairable, I don't think we can set aside the fact that two bodies offer so much more flexibility than one plus you get the added bonus of AE with the bessa type A bodies.
However I still agree that the m6 is by far better, I just feel that the bessa suits the OP's situation better.
Just my opinion.
//Jan
mfogiel
Veteran
I would suggest something else: a Zeiss Ikon with the 35/1.2 Nokton - on the high quality and more expensive side, and the Minolta CLE with the 40/1.4 Nokton on the cheap side - the second option is also much smaller and lighter than anything else around. Get a camera with AE - for slow shooting you have the MF anyway. BTW the CLE will serve you well as a 28mm body later, when you will get the 28mm and 50mm lenses.
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
Merkin, if it were me I'd go with an M6 and a 40 Summicron-C (already mentioned above) or the M-Rokkor equivalent. The 40 has the Leica "look" and is very well built.
Lots of M 40mm info
Lots of M 40mm info
knodd
Member
Hi Merkin,
If you've got this strange attraction to the m6 that you can't really explain or rationalize, I think you should just go ahead and get it.
I've owned an r3a for close to a year and its a great camera and all, i really love it, but there's this strange strange thing that keeps drawing me to the m6 and i'm sure i will end up getting one sooner or later.
So unless you've got really good self control or whatnot go ahead and get the m6
If you've got this strange attraction to the m6 that you can't really explain or rationalize, I think you should just go ahead and get it.
I've owned an r3a for close to a year and its a great camera and all, i really love it, but there's this strange strange thing that keeps drawing me to the m6 and i'm sure i will end up getting one sooner or later.
So unless you've got really good self control or whatnot go ahead and get the m6
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
If you think you might regret not getting the M6, then just get it now and be done with it. Personally, every time I opt for my second choice, I end up going back later and getting the first choice - sometimes costing me more money in the long run. And you'd certainly lose money if you later decide to sell the bessa (assuming you do buy it new) and make the switch.
You mentioned the red dot - i doubt many thieves know what that red dot really means. I'd feel a lot more vulnerable with an SLR and a nice big lens.
Before you finalize your purchases - give some more thought to used lenses. I've owned dozens of lenses over the years. I can only remember buying 3-4 that were new. As long you get something you can return (after a brief trial period), you'll be fine.
The great thing is, you'd probably be able to get the M6 and a pair of lenses, if you buy used instead of new. Especially if you are willing to consider some of the other choices mentioned by other posters.
You mentioned the red dot - i doubt many thieves know what that red dot really means. I'd feel a lot more vulnerable with an SLR and a nice big lens.
Before you finalize your purchases - give some more thought to used lenses. I've owned dozens of lenses over the years. I can only remember buying 3-4 that were new. As long you get something you can return (after a brief trial period), you'll be fine.
The great thing is, you'd probably be able to get the M6 and a pair of lenses, if you buy used instead of new. Especially if you are willing to consider some of the other choices mentioned by other posters.
usagisakana
Established
I was faced with a similar decision. I ended up saving that little bit extra through working more, and got an M6 and 50 planar. Am extremely happy. I'll probably end up with a 35 or 28 down the track, but between that and the 50 I've got everything covered that I could conceivably want to do with this rig.
I'm particularly happy with the choice of buying the M6. The ergonomics suit me and it's quiet. I'm sure the bessas are great cameras too, however I am glad I chose the M6.
I'm particularly happy with the choice of buying the M6. The ergonomics suit me and it's quiet. I'm sure the bessas are great cameras too, however I am glad I chose the M6.
Last edited:
Merkin
For the Weekend
I don't necessarily want to buy two bodies, but with the r2a/m, if i wanted wider angle lenses, i would have to buy an r4a/m, because I hold no truck with external viewfinders. Aside from the durability factor, the increased number of framelines is the strongest argument for the m6 (for me, at least). I admit that having two bodies would be handy, although I would probably only carry one at a time.
mirrored
Established
Larger magnification on finder have primary advantages. (1:1 have even one more.) Additional finder for a wide angle is very fine working too.
Last edited:
Svitantti
Well-known
About buying new lenses vs. old ones and being over-cautios of minor marks on lenses:
http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2008.10.30/front-element-scratches
http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2008.10.30/front-element-scratches
kxl
Social Documentary
Body - get the ZI
Lens - 1 lens; if you can deal with the size and cost, get the Nokton 35/1.2 -- great for both day and night time shooting.
Lens - 1 lens; if you can deal with the size and cost, get the Nokton 35/1.2 -- great for both day and night time shooting.
ferider
Veteran
Start with M6 and 35/1.4 and see where it leads you ....
Or even better, get an M2 (for around the price of an R2*) and the 35. The 35/1.4 should be a great daylight lens as well and is smaller than the Planar.
Best,
Roland.
Or even better, get an M2 (for around the price of an R2*) and the 35. The 35/1.4 should be a great daylight lens as well and is smaller than the Planar.
Best,
Roland.
Merkin
For the Weekend
I think i have decided to go with the M6, mainly because I found out that the light meter is either 1 or 2 EVs more sensitive on the dark end. I know that early m6's metered down to ev 0, while later ones metered down to ev -1. how do I know which is which, so i can get one that goes to -1, and how much of a price difference would there be?
Now that I have picked a body, which of the lenses would you reccommend? i am in love with the look of planars when you give em plenty of DOF, but i also like the fact that i would be able to shoot in significantly lower light with the CV.
Now that I have picked a body, which of the lenses would you reccommend? i am in love with the look of planars when you give em plenty of DOF, but i also like the fact that i would be able to shoot in significantly lower light with the CV.
maddoc
... likes film again.
The M6 "classic" (the one with the smaller old-type shutter dial) meters down to 0 EV and has only two LEDs, whereas the newer M6TTL goes down to -2 (at 100ISO) and has three LEDs in the VF.
Under low light conditions the meter is not really necessary and you can always get along with f/1.4 1/15s or 1/30s with 400ISO film (for EV values around 3, dim lighted street scenes or in bars)
I would go for the M6 classic with a 40mm Summicron-C, best value for the $$$, IMHO.
Under low light conditions the meter is not really necessary and you can always get along with f/1.4 1/15s or 1/30s with 400ISO film (for EV values around 3, dim lighted street scenes or in bars)
I would go for the M6 classic with a 40mm Summicron-C, best value for the $$$, IMHO.
mirrored
Established
Down to EV 0 is a very good ability. I used in early '80 my first SLR, Nikkormat FTn and the meter goes only to EV 3. Thus I metered in low light, but the border was typically used so that needle of the meter jumps to nonmetering stage when border was achieved, but this was successful stil with manual camera. I have difficulties to explain how this work with my english skills, but no difficulties to meter accurate even little over meters limit.
For a handhold situations it was OK (but often in a border), and long time exposures with stativ in the night sometimes usable too by estimating and calculating from meter show from lighter part of the landscape. Adding time with stops: 1 - 2 - 4 - 8 - 16 - 30 - 60sek and so on. + reciprocity failure). When enough dark, experience is better than meter anyway.
For a handhold situations it was OK (but often in a border), and long time exposures with stativ in the night sometimes usable too by estimating and calculating from meter show from lighter part of the landscape. Adding time with stops: 1 - 2 - 4 - 8 - 16 - 30 - 60sek and so on. + reciprocity failure). When enough dark, experience is better than meter anyway.
Last edited:
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Hi,
I'd go with the Bessa. I went from the Bessa R to an M5. The M5 and the M6 have identical finders, except for some minor flare issues on the M6 and the more cluttered framelines on the M6 and different meter display. Unlike apparently everyone else, I dont think the Leica finder is much better. The M5 wins in other respects, such as having a spot meter and better general ergonomics with my big hands, which you both won't get with the M6.
For god's sake look through the M6 finder before saying that added framelines are an advantage! Over the Bessa it has the 28 and 135 framelines. The 135 I literally never used. The 28 on the M6 are next to invisible for me already without glasses; if you wear glasses you won't simply be seeing them, so they're useless. The 50 and 75 are always displayed together, so the 75 clutters up the 50 frame. I'm actually glad that the M5 doesn't have 75mm framelines. On the Bessa, on the other hand, the 50 and 75 framelines are displayed separately and don't interfere with each other.
The Bessa is a pretty rugged camera actually. If you drop it, any camera may break, a Leica no less, no matter how people rave about "built like a tank". I gave my Bessa a pretty rough treatment and wouldn't hesitate to do it again, see these pictures when I sold it:
The Bessa looked pretty roughed up, but it worked like a clockwork all the time. After giving my M5 the same treatment for a year and a half, the vulcanite comes off in flakes and the viewfinder window has a crack (not that I mind), so there's much legend to the legendary durability. The rangefinder is probably a bit more fiddly to adjust on the Bessa if it gets misaligned, but for the M6 you need a special tool, which you don't for the Bessa.
If presented with your choice, I'd lean towards the R2A. Running without batteries is overrated too, IMHO. You can get the Bessa's button cells everywhere in the world. If you're worried, tape a fresh set to the bottom of the camera. AE on the other hand is nice, I've missed it a number of times. In general the lens is more important than the body IMHO, but only if you compare between bodies with similar capabilities; no lens will give you automatic exposure; AE has a lot of added value.
Seriously think about getting a ZI body! It has AE, good ergonomics, and unlike the M6, the finder is actually much better than that of the Bessa; in fact it is much better than Leica finders, too, with a bigger image, and more accurate than most Leica finders, too.
Meter sensitivity on the ZI goes down to EV 0 @ISO100 like on the M6, on the Bessas it goes to EV 1. Note: EV 0 means 1/4 second at f/1.4 and ISO 800 - so when the meter goes out you won't be able to handhold the camera anymore. If you carry a tripod, carry a good external meater - a Profisix goes to EV -6 and beats any in-camera meter hands down. I did a lot of low-light photography and never found the Bessa's sensitivity to be a problem.
The smugness factor is overrated. And if you take the smugness factor seriously, Leica aficionados apparently don't like the M6 all that much. They take smugness to the extreme: an M6 is a primitive, plebeian, half-electronic, half-plastic camera to some of them So if you want "the feeling", get an M2 or so, maybe for cheap as a second body one day, or an M4, and learn to use an external meter, it's part of "the feeling".
A thief might be more attracted to the M6's red dot but I doubt it, most thieves steal things, not brands. You can always put lots of tape and Hello Kitty stickers all over your cameras to make them unattractive.
With the 2 lenses you'll be better off. I'm not sure whether it makes much sense to go for a 35 and a 50, maybe something more different would be better - a 50 and a 21, or a 35 and a 75. From the current lineups my choice would be a Voigtländer 21/f4 and a Zeiss 50/f1.5 (don't listen to Internet talk about the latter lens, look at pictures instead) or 50/f2. If you want a 35, instead of the 35/1.4 I'd lean towards the 35/1.2, which is a bit big, but has very good ergonomics and is one of the most beautiful lenses in the Voigtländer lineup in terms of images, and since you want a low-light lens the extra half stop won't hurt either.
Last piece of advice: Doing research for a few months can actually be very misleading if you do it on the Internet. One can never tell whether another person's affection for their own gear translates into a real photographic value for yourself. You'll read a lot of people raving about their Leicas, more than the Leica is actually worth as a camera IMHO. People tend to be a bit too emotionally invested in them if you see what I mean. They're good cameras, but they're not the camera to end all cameras no matter what people say, and other mothers have nice daughters, too.
Philipp
I'd go with the Bessa. I went from the Bessa R to an M5. The M5 and the M6 have identical finders, except for some minor flare issues on the M6 and the more cluttered framelines on the M6 and different meter display. Unlike apparently everyone else, I dont think the Leica finder is much better. The M5 wins in other respects, such as having a spot meter and better general ergonomics with my big hands, which you both won't get with the M6.
For god's sake look through the M6 finder before saying that added framelines are an advantage! Over the Bessa it has the 28 and 135 framelines. The 135 I literally never used. The 28 on the M6 are next to invisible for me already without glasses; if you wear glasses you won't simply be seeing them, so they're useless. The 50 and 75 are always displayed together, so the 75 clutters up the 50 frame. I'm actually glad that the M5 doesn't have 75mm framelines. On the Bessa, on the other hand, the 50 and 75 framelines are displayed separately and don't interfere with each other.
The Bessa is a pretty rugged camera actually. If you drop it, any camera may break, a Leica no less, no matter how people rave about "built like a tank". I gave my Bessa a pretty rough treatment and wouldn't hesitate to do it again, see these pictures when I sold it:
The Bessa looked pretty roughed up, but it worked like a clockwork all the time. After giving my M5 the same treatment for a year and a half, the vulcanite comes off in flakes and the viewfinder window has a crack (not that I mind), so there's much legend to the legendary durability. The rangefinder is probably a bit more fiddly to adjust on the Bessa if it gets misaligned, but for the M6 you need a special tool, which you don't for the Bessa.
If presented with your choice, I'd lean towards the R2A. Running without batteries is overrated too, IMHO. You can get the Bessa's button cells everywhere in the world. If you're worried, tape a fresh set to the bottom of the camera. AE on the other hand is nice, I've missed it a number of times. In general the lens is more important than the body IMHO, but only if you compare between bodies with similar capabilities; no lens will give you automatic exposure; AE has a lot of added value.
Seriously think about getting a ZI body! It has AE, good ergonomics, and unlike the M6, the finder is actually much better than that of the Bessa; in fact it is much better than Leica finders, too, with a bigger image, and more accurate than most Leica finders, too.
Meter sensitivity on the ZI goes down to EV 0 @ISO100 like on the M6, on the Bessas it goes to EV 1. Note: EV 0 means 1/4 second at f/1.4 and ISO 800 - so when the meter goes out you won't be able to handhold the camera anymore. If you carry a tripod, carry a good external meater - a Profisix goes to EV -6 and beats any in-camera meter hands down. I did a lot of low-light photography and never found the Bessa's sensitivity to be a problem.
The smugness factor is overrated. And if you take the smugness factor seriously, Leica aficionados apparently don't like the M6 all that much. They take smugness to the extreme: an M6 is a primitive, plebeian, half-electronic, half-plastic camera to some of them
So if you want "the feeling", get an M2 or so, maybe for cheap as a second body one day, or an M4, and learn to use an external meter, it's part of "the feeling".A thief might be more attracted to the M6's red dot but I doubt it, most thieves steal things, not brands. You can always put lots of tape and Hello Kitty stickers all over your cameras to make them unattractive.
With the 2 lenses you'll be better off. I'm not sure whether it makes much sense to go for a 35 and a 50, maybe something more different would be better - a 50 and a 21, or a 35 and a 75. From the current lineups my choice would be a Voigtländer 21/f4 and a Zeiss 50/f1.5 (don't listen to Internet talk about the latter lens, look at pictures instead) or 50/f2. If you want a 35, instead of the 35/1.4 I'd lean towards the 35/1.2, which is a bit big, but has very good ergonomics and is one of the most beautiful lenses in the Voigtländer lineup in terms of images, and since you want a low-light lens the extra half stop won't hurt either.
Last piece of advice: Doing research for a few months can actually be very misleading if you do it on the Internet. One can never tell whether another person's affection for their own gear translates into a real photographic value for yourself. You'll read a lot of people raving about their Leicas, more than the Leica is actually worth as a camera IMHO. People tend to be a bit too emotionally invested in them if you see what I mean. They're good cameras, but they're not the camera to end all cameras no matter what people say, and other mothers have nice daughters, too.
Philipp
Last edited:
Merkin
For the Weekend
maddoc- were the m6 classic and the m6 ttl made concurrently, or was the ttl like a m6.5? how much price difference is there between the two? do all classics go to ev 0, and all ttls go to ev -2? also, regarding the 40mm cron (or any 40, for that matter), is there a composition rule of thumb considering there isn't a 40mm frameline? I wear glasses, although the prescription in my right eye (my shooting eye) is the weakest that can be prescribed (.25, if i recall correctly), and I don't know if i can get a diopter that weak. It is just bad enough that my focusing sometimes has slight fuzz at wide open apertures. I say that because I know that some glasses wearers can have a spot of trouble seeing all of the framelines on rangefinders some of the time, and I didn't know if that would be in play in this situation.
mirrored- I appreciate your advice, and I understand what you are saying about the metering. Personally, if i am shooting a still subject and it is too dark for the meter, I just dig deep in to reciprocity failure by using the smallest aperture possible with 100 speed film, use a tripod and cable release, and let the exposure fly for an hour or so, since it is really difficult to overexpose film in very dark situations. Low light handholding and metering is mainly a concern for night time street and indoor photography for me, and in those situations, the spontaneousness is often lost by waving around a handheld meter, particularly when you are metering close to someone's face. In a lot of situations, particularly when the lighting isn't "tricky," i just go by the ultimate exposure computer chart, which I am gradually memorizing.
mirrored- I appreciate your advice, and I understand what you are saying about the metering. Personally, if i am shooting a still subject and it is too dark for the meter, I just dig deep in to reciprocity failure by using the smallest aperture possible with 100 speed film, use a tripod and cable release, and let the exposure fly for an hour or so, since it is really difficult to overexpose film in very dark situations. Low light handholding and metering is mainly a concern for night time street and indoor photography for me, and in those situations, the spontaneousness is often lost by waving around a handheld meter, particularly when you are metering close to someone's face. In a lot of situations, particularly when the lighting isn't "tricky," i just go by the ultimate exposure computer chart, which I am gradually memorizing.
maddoc
... likes film again.
The M6TTL came after the M6 classic and had added features like the TTL flash metering and a newer electronic. Problem when wearing glasses is that the frame lines for 35mm are difficult and for 28 mm hardly to see. (I wear glasses, too). The M6TTL was also available with 0.58x finder, much better suited for wide angle lenses. Alternatively, you could go for a Konica Hexar RF (0.6x VF) with AE (and motorized drive) but very limited service options.
My 40mm Summicron-C was modified to bring up the 35mm frame lines. Wearing glasses, the part of the 35mm frame that I could see without moving my eyes, pretty good matched the FoV of the 40mm lens.
Rangefinder cameras, eye glasses and wide-angle lenses don't go well together ... If you opt for a low magnification VF, you will have problems focusing fast 50mm and longer lenses and with higher magnification VF, seeing the frame lines for WA lenses is less than ideal.
My advice is to test the cameras before you buy. It really depends on your personal (eye/glasses) situation.
My 40mm Summicron-C was modified to bring up the 35mm frame lines. Wearing glasses, the part of the 35mm frame that I could see without moving my eyes, pretty good matched the FoV of the 40mm lens.
Rangefinder cameras, eye glasses and wide-angle lenses don't go well together ... If you opt for a low magnification VF, you will have problems focusing fast 50mm and longer lenses and with higher magnification VF, seeing the frame lines for WA lenses is less than ideal.
My advice is to test the cameras before you buy. It really depends on your personal (eye/glasses) situation.