Views on the M5

[Gid]

How does the M5 compare with the more "usual" Ms. (Don't mean to offend any current M5 owners) How does the size compare - is its really much bigger? What about ergonomics, wind on, shutter noise - are they all comparable?

Thanks

Gid

 

[Andrew Sowerby]

Never used one myself. There's a pretty good run down of the various Leica Ms on Cameraquest which you've probably seen before but just in case:

http://cameraquest.com/mguide.htm

 

[harmsr]

Andrew gave good advice on checking on cameraquest.

I have two types of Ms (M5 & MP).

The M5 is a little bigger but still feels very good to my hand. I enjoy 50mm the most of all the focal lengths and the M5 has the most accurate and easy to use 50mm single frame of the Ms. VF is 35, 50, 90 for frame lines, .72 mag that is very bright and flare resistant. Rewind is very easy with a rachet (this is a plus) on the bottom of the camera. General operation and sound is the same as any M. The M5 is metered like the later cameras and has the smallest spot meter of any M. I find this meter much more accurate and easy to use than the later M6/M7/MP type. The M5 actually shows meter readings as the needle/bar in the VF. This is the only M other than the M7 (in auto) to actually show the shutter speed in the VF. The M5 does have a self-timer also.

Does it sound like I think the M5 is a great camera?

 

[Trius]

harmsr: That's a great shot of the M5; in black it looks wonderufl! Thanks for the concise summary of it's good points. That cinches it for me; if I go M, it will be M5!

 

[Ronald M]

It is designed for discontinued mercury batteries. You will need a work around. The two lug models hang vertically from one end . The less common 3 lug ones work either way.

Check with DAG or Sherry to see if replacement cells are available. They are getting old.

Certain lenses that protrude deeply into the body block the meter arm movement and can`t be used. DR eyes will not rest properly on the top as it is a bit higher.

Find yourself a nice M6 and be happy,

 

[Bertram2]

How does the M5 compare with the more "usual" Ms. (Don't mean to offend any current M5 owners) How does the size compare - is its really much bigger? What about ergonomics, wind on, shutter noise - are they all comparable?

Thanks

Gid

I would like to add a question about the differences to other Ms:
Recently I read that the M5 was a real step forward in the evolution of the Ms, but n "many people did not like it" .. Why not ?
The M6 is allegedly a step back to the M3 design, so what was the reason the M5 had not the necessary acceptance ? Is that true at all ? To me this M5 looks great ?

bertram

 

[Hibbs]

harmsr...that rig looks like it just came home from the store. what is the case and strap? luigi?

thanks

 

[Andrew Sowerby]

In the two lug version are the lugs on the shutter release side or the VF side?

Edit: I just took my own advice and looked at the CQ page. Seems the two lugs are on the VF side. This seems to me to be a terrible idea -- what about folks who use wrist straps?!?

 

[Daniel Kreithen]

How does the M5 compare with the more "usual" Ms. (Don't mean to offend any current M5 owners) How does the size compare - is its really much bigger? What about ergonomics, wind on, shutter noise - are they all comparable?

I've owned an M4, M6, and M5. The M5 is large by comparison to the other two, but may be easier to handle for someone with big hands. The pairing with the lens is important: the M5 will most naturally pair with some of the larger Leica lenses. Ergonomics of the M5 are actually superior to the other M's in some ways due to the placement of the shutter speed dial and the shutter speed readout visible in the viewfinder. The meter is at least as accurate as the M6, with a smaller spot meter pattern. Wind on feels similar to the other M's, and the shutter noise is comparable but a bit different due to the metering stalk swinging out of the way. Film loading is improved compared to the other M's due to the center stalk of the takeup reel being "filled" by a small rod. I don't know why this nice feature was not re-introduced with the M6, but it wasn't. All in all a great camera - but it's difficult to switch between the standard M body shape and the M5. If you get two cameras make them both M5's, otherwise you'll be putting your fingers in the wrong place on one or the other.

 

[Trius]

It is designed for discontinued mercury batteries. You will need a work around. The two lug models hang vertically from one end . The less common 3 lug ones work either way.

Check with DAG or Sherry to see if replacement cells are available. They are getting old.

Certain lenses that protrude deeply into the body block the meter arm movement and can`t be used. DR eyes will not rest properly on the top as it is a bit higher.

Find yourself a nice M6 and be happy,

Workarounds for the battery are several and easy. There are lots of older RFs that require the PX625 that I use quite successfuly.

The lens limitations are well-known and easily resolved.

Given the M5's unique abilities, why would you "advise" someone to pass on the M5 and "be happy" with an M6? I'm happy that you're happy with an M5. If someone's happy with an M5...

 

[Vickko]

Slap a Noctilux on an M5 and you'll have one of the best balanced picture-making machines that Leitz ever produced. Same when you put a 90/2 lens on it.
I find the ergonomics preferable to the smaller M's, in regards to the shutter dial and the metering display.
I find the LED's in the M6/MP really annoying. I would rather meter with a needle any day, including a hand-held meter.

regards
Vick

 

[harmsr]

The batteries are easy to work around and still use the calibrated meter with the 1.35V. The advantage of the 1.35V is that is gives a consistent meter reading until the cell is dead while the 1.5V batteries change reading as they drain.

The one in my photo was a 2 lug camera. The 2 lugs are on the VF side. Sherry added the third lug for me when she did a CLA.

The case and strap are Luigi. I could not ask for a better made case.

The DR issue is easy to fix. Remove the plastic nub on the back of the eyes and it fits the M5 just like any M body. I have a 50 DR which is one of my favorite lenses and it resides on this M5 quite often.

There are only a few lenses which don't work with the M5 meter. This is over emphasized. I have a 35 Lux ASPH, 35 Cron ASPH, 50 Cron DR, 50 Lux ASPH, and 75 Cron ASPH which all work perfectly on the M5. (I think that the 35 Cron is going to be sold in favor of keeping the 35 Lux.)

I use the 75 by either estimating from the 50 frame line or with the Voightlander external finder. I VERY MUCH prefer the simple 35/135, 50, 90 frame lines over the cluttered 6 frame finders of the later cameras.

The other advantage of the M5 VF is that the metering area is defined in the VF, where it is not in the later cameras. (35 meter is 135 frame / 50 meter is 4 arcs defining area / 90 meter is the range finder patch / 135 meter is the range finder patch)

Best,

Ray

P.S.: Thanks for the nice comment on the photo of my M5.

 

[MCTuomey]

M5: leica with working mojo, funk exponent

All other M bodies: non-mojo, non-funk

 

[waileong]

It's big and ugly

It's big and ugly

The M5 was too big, too ugly and too heavy. That's why it didn't sell. That's why people didn't like it. That's why it nearly broke Leica.

We talk about camera porn sometimes, when you look at an M2 or M3 or M4, you see the retro elegance and classic design, but when you look at the M5, it's just a hunk of metal.

Leica is a philosophy as much as a camera-- the belief in being light, compact and discreet. The M5 broke away from all that.

I would like to add a question about the differences to other Ms:
Recently I read that the M5 was a real step forward in the evolution of the Ms, but n "many people did not like it" .. Why not ?
The M6 is allegedly a step back to the M3 design, so what was the reason the M5 had not the necessary acceptance ? Is that true at all ? To me this M5 looks great ?

bertram

 

[back alley]

The M5 was too big, too ugly and too heavy. That's why it didn't sell. That's why people didn't like it. That's why it nearly broke Leica.

We talk about camera porn sometimes, when you look at an M2 or M3 or M4, you see the retro elegance and classic design, but when you look at the M5, it's just a hunk of metal.

Leica is a philosophy as much as a camera-- the belief in being light, compact and discreet. The M5 broke away from all that.

if that were all true then why did the smaller, lighter and even more discreet leica cl fail also?

joe

 

[kvanderlaag]

The Leica M5 is not less stylish, it is simply differently stylish. It's like comparing girls - a London Goth to a Dresden Goth, for instance. One is refined and elegant and as much an element of fluid style as practicality, and the other is rugged and functional, futuristic and rigid, equally beautiful in her austere practicality.

Some day, I will own one.

The M5, not the goth girl.

I already have several of those.

 

[harry01562]

The M5 was too big, too ugly and too heavy. That's why it didn't sell. That's why people didn't like it. That's why it nearly broke Leica.

We talk about camera porn sometimes, when you look at an M2 or M3 or M4, you see the retro elegance and classic design, but when you look at the M5, it's just a hunk of metal.

Leica is a philosophy as much as a camera-- the belief in being light, compact and discreet. The M5 broke away from all that.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.... never truer than when seeking it in a camera. Many felt this way when the M5 was introduced, but it has found it's place in the collector/user ranks, and is now much more desirable. That's largely due to the factors that have been well described by others in this thread. It might be a good idea to handle several models, but I doubt the M5 would be a dissapointment for an informed buyer.

Harry

 

[waileong]

Conspiracy theory

Conspiracy theory

There's a conspiracy theory on this. Check Cameraquest.

if that were all true then why did the smaller, lighter and even more discreet leica cl fail also?

joe

 

[laverda3c]

The M5 was too big, too ugly and too heavy. That's why it didn't sell. That's why people didn't like it. That's why it nearly broke Leica.

We talk about camera porn sometimes, when you look at an M2 or M3 or M4, you see the retro elegance and classic design, but when you look at the M5, it's just a hunk of metal.

Leica is a philosophy as much as a camera-- the belief in being light, compact and discreet. The M5 broke away from all that.

You are obviously entitled to your opinion. Mine is slightly different.

When I was looking to buy a rangefinder I was faced with the classic decision of what to get. Since I intended to use my camera and didn't want too steep a learning curve I wanted a built in meter. This narrowed my choice to the M5, M6 or Bessas. I settled on the M5 for cost (a user is still cheaper than an M6) and noise reasons.

Yes it is bigger and heavier than other M series Leicas but that doesn't bother me. You might think it is ugly but to me its usefullness far out weigh what it looks like. I guess I am not a camera fondler...

Cheers,

Mark

 

[Palaeoboy]

The M5 was too big, too ugly and too heavy. That's why it didn't sell.

If thats a valid reason how did Nikon sell a million Nikon F's. Now thats one ugly heavy camera.

I think the failure of the M5/CL was a number of factors and cant be attributed to any one thing like it larger size. SLR's where in their peak and I think that the CL took away some M sales. But I think it was just that era where new technologies were comming out in SLR's and thats where people looked to explore at that time.