What M to buy

[Popum]

Hi

I'm a digital photgrapher who is considering trying B&W film. I like the classic "Leica" look in prints. The question is... what camera and lens to buy without breaking the bank. Where is the sweet spot on the value curve so that I'm happy with the output, but not unhappy with the cost.

All insights appreciated.

Popum

 

[John]

I was in a similar position to you a while back. I ended up with an M3 and a Canon 50/1.8 for about $750. I have acquired a few lenses since then, but nothing that broke the bank.
Some of these "user grade" cameras need a clean, lube, adjust. You will also likely want a lightmeter. 🙂

 

[MCTuomey]

hi popum - welcome to the forum

you will get a diversity of views in response to your question, no doubt

if you are comfortable using a handheld meter, go with one of the meterless bodies - M2, M3, M4, M4-2, M4-P. these bodies are least cost, usually, assuming decent condition.

if you want a meter in the camera, then it's M5 or M6 (non-ttl or ttl). the M5 is probably the best bargain out there today, imho.

if you want the meter and auto-exposure, it's an M7. big bucks.

should mention the bessa and zeiss ikon bodies are M compatible. you can have a warranted new camera at reasonable cost.

first lens? if it has to be leica, i'd say a summicron 50/2. it's "normal" and pretty fast and good all-around. several variants, all good in different ways. the newer the cron, the more expensive

but i believe that your choice of film and development is probably more responsible for the "look" than the gear. this is a very debatable point but it's part of the decision process ... and the fun, too

good luck!

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

Welcome

Depends on what your price point is and what focal length you favor.

1) M2/M3 cameras (without meter) anywhere from $600 to $800, M2 (for 35mm focal length), M3 (for 50mm focal length);

2) M6 Classic about $900 (meter)

3) M6TTL (meter) roughly $1200 to $1400 depending on condition

Lenses

Very wide range of choices ... but since you've asked for the classic 'Leica' look (that means a wide range of things to different people), I'll assume you are speaking of Leica lenses.

1) 50mm /2 summicrons, 50 rigid, 50 DR (close focusing), 50 IV (tabbed) 50 (current, hooded). Range from $500 to $850

2) 40mm summicron-c, 40mm rokkor-m , range from $250 to $350, higher price favoring the german made summicron-c (arbitrary collector inflation)

3) 35mm summicron, 35 pre-aspherical (various versions from $800 to $1200, with probably the IV version commanding the most); 35 aspherical range $1200 to $1600

If you let us know your shooting preferences, we may be able to narrow those choices down. Do you prefer an in-camera meter? Do you prefer 50, 40, or 35 focal length (or wider)? etc .

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

but i have to say that your choice of film and development is probably more responsible for the "look" than the gear.

Mike makes a great point. So often people speak of the 'look' of a photo they really like and want to replicate that 'look'. Elements such as tonality, grain, smoothness ...

And it turns out the qualities they like are more a consequence of the film rather than any particular lens or camera. For instance, you will likely get more comments about richness, or creaminess, or bokeh, or smooth tonality when a shot is taken on low iso 100 film, such as Fuji Acros or Tmax 100. But that is an affect and effect of low ISO film.

Don't get me wrong, I love Leica lenses. But they are not anymore magical than other very competent lenses, such as those from Canon, Voigtlander, Zeiss, Konica etc.

Only when you control for the film and development, can you really isolate differences accounted for solely by the lens 🙂

So what accounts for the 'leica look' you speak of? Depends on the film, development, and lens of the photos you saw.

 

[John]

There look to be some decent deals in the classifieds now, give or take $50. M6, M2, and probably some others. 🙂

 

[dadsm3]

Welcome. Don't let the lack of a meter stop you from getting an M2/3/4....the MR and MR4 meters work perfectly well and are coupled to the speed dial, and you can get a user for around $50, but they do make the camera slightly larger. A handheld meter is even better.
There's a considerable jump in price to go to an M6 with built in meter.
Lens? Has to be a 50mm Summicron to start....people swear by the DR (dual range) that'll let you take shots up to 17" away (with the goggles, they are removed for regular distance shots), but I'm sure the normal rigids must be just as good. After that, your personal preferences will determine your next lens.
Just be aware that the M2's have viewfinder framelines for 35/50/90mm lenses while the M3's have them for 50/90/135mm. I think the M4's have framelines for 35-135mm, but they were never as popular as the M2/3's. You can use a 35mm lens on the M3 but the lenses have goggles to give the proper view. Some people hate 'em, some love 'em, but 35mm lenses without the goggles are far more expensive....
I think developing is the primary factor, but I've found that the vintage lenses (1950/60's) will tend to give you that "classic" look more often.

 

[rover]

If it is the Leica look you are after and a budget that you have to be concerned about then I would ask what about the look is it that you attracts you. There are tons of great RF M lenses to use with a RF. In addition to the film and developer you choose, the lens may be the most important. For me, I always loved the look of images from the 50 Summicron. Ultimately I choose to start off with a Bessa R2 body and that lens and was very happy. I would suggest that if you see particular quality in images that you like pay attention to the gear that they were shot with to determine if it is one item that is producing what you like and focus on that as the main part of your kit. The rest will fall in place from there.

 

[1dave]

You may want to look at Konica Hexar RF. Takes all M mount lenses. Basically a vastly under-rated M7 alternative. I consider it one of the best available.
Dave

 

[FrankS]

If you want Leica but the budget is small, you can't beat the Leica CL with 40mm Summicron or Rokkor lens. A screwmount Leica III, IIIa, IIIc, IIIf, IIf with a collapsible 50mm lens or a 35mm Summaron is also a compact and less expensive option.

I THINK RFF member RML (Remy) still has his Leica M2 for sale for a reasonable amount.

 

[peter_n]

One thing to factor into your price considerations of old or new is condition. An M2 or an M3 may need a CLA (clean, lube, adjust) which can run to $300 sometimes. A rigid Summicron almost certainly has haze on the internal elements and cleaning marks on the front element which you may want to get fixed. Newer cameras and lenses such as an M4 or M6 or a 1970's Summicron will suffer a lot less from these issues and may be a better buy. If you see attractive items for sale email the seller about condition anyway; the last thing you want is unexpected repair $$$.

 

[Popum]

Thank You

Thank You

Thanks... you guys are terrific. I never expected so many thoughtful responces so quickly. What I like about the "leica" look is the gritty B&W street work. The combination of sharpness and grain.

You are also making me understand that if I'm serious about film I'm going to at least have to develop my own. I'm curious, how typical is wet printing versus scanning and photoshop?

Popum

 

[FrankS]

There is a hybred procedure: develop your own film, then scan it. This is probably the best solution for most as it gives you the advantages of film without the need for a traditional darkroom.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

oh, "without breaking the bank". Hmm...a Leica IIIc/d Make sure it's been CLA'd. The film loading may drive you nuts, though.

If it's the look you're after, perhaps you can start with a Bessa R; it's relatively cheap, has a lightmeter, and you can use the screwmount (aka LTM) lenses available for Leica bodies.

 

[peter_n]

how typical is wet printing versus scanning and photoshop?

Everyone is different. As Frank says you can get the "look" of film by using a dedicated film scanner, and many of us do that. Then how you output it is up to you. Some people are happy with a digital printer, others want the wet darkroom (I'm one of them). Judging by the rapidly plummeting prices of traditional darkroom equipment, Photoshop and digital printing is pretty popular.

Welcome to the forum BTW! 🙂

 

[matt fury]

I hope nobody gets mad at me for a little blatant self-promotion, but I do have a nice M2 for sale in the classifieds... 🙂