Which M to supplement my SLR kit?

[De_Corday]

Hey all. Apologies, this is a topic that I know gets rehashed constantly...

I'm a journalist starting to do documentary work, and pretty wedded to the Nikon SLR system. I shoot a D700 and bunch of F3's and F2's that really give me almost everything I need, and the lens interchangeability among them is awesome and key to the way I work.

But more and more I find myself wishing I had a smaller, more discrete camera, something I can use in a situation that requires a quiet shutter (churches and the like), something that gets very small so I don't have to carry around a big bag and look like a reporter, something that doesn't look at all threatening (like a D700 with a 2.8 zoom does). It'd be mostly for doc work so film is fine.

I'd like a meter, but it's not necessary. But--one or the other. A non-working meter is a cluttered VF for no reason, IMHO. Build quality is paramount, but for me that means ruggedness more than it means feel. e.g. the material used to make the gears in the film transport doesn't mean so much to me--the fact that I can use my F bodies in a rainstorm, or that they can survive being thrown in a bag all day every day, that's what I mean by build quality.

As for frame lines: It's doubtful Leica will become my main system. I will always go to the Nikons for telephoto work, most likely for wide angle work too. I love 50mm lenses. I'm intrigued by the prospect of a 40mm lens. I don't see myself going as wide as a 28 on a Leica, nor tighter than a 70.

This is my appraisal of the various M options. Please set me straight where I need straight-setting:

-Were money no object, M6 or M7--metered, new(-ish), easy to load, won't need work for a while.

-Money being an object (did I mention I'm a journalist?) The CL, M3 and M2 look mighty nice.

-The M4 and its variants sound like the middle ground, but don't seem, on the whole, inexpensive enough relative to an M6.

-What's the deal with the M5??

Most of the criticisms I hear about the CL seem to be that it's not a good system camera... it doesn't play nice with the full range of lenses, the ergonomics are too different, etc. For someone like me, looking for a one-off M platform for normal lens work, will this matter? Or is the CL simply a notch below all around? Are the CL and M5 meters truly, consistently repairable?

Also, it should be noted, cosmetic condition doesn't matter at all to me. All my cameras are dented and brassed with faded paint, and they all work wonderfully. I'm also not opposed to doing a little CLA work on my own.

Sorry for this rambling post... its just an expensive system to buy in to with many confusing sets of options.

 

[AlexBG]

M6 with a good 50. All you would ever need with the rest of your cameras. Black ones are more discreet and a lot cheaper than a black M3. Plus with a meter built in you won't need to carry one.

http://www.japancamerahunter.com/2012/11/what-is-the-best-leica-m-for-you/

Get an M6, then buy a jupiter 8 and then save for the lens you want. If you use the M6 and don't like it you'll be able to sell it for what you paid for it.

 

[kehng]

Leica CL is perfectly fine. It's not as nice to feel, look at etc etc as the bigger Ms but if you're not going to go wide or tele, the 40 summicron is a fine lens indeed. It holds up well to the 35mm and 50mm summicrons which are much more expensive.

I have a dented, paint scratched ugly duckling that works perfectly which fits in my cycling jacket pocket, and therefore goes everywhere my bike goes. It's been dropped, been in my pocket when I was hit by a van and it keeps going. Even if the meter dies, Sunny 16 will get me out of trouble.

FWIW I also own an M3, M7 and M9. I love the M3 for its classic simplicity and feel but for a photo journalist that's probably slightly irrelevant. The M7 is great for auto and faster shooting, but I would choose either CL and 40 cron or M6 (as it is slightly smaller than the M7) and a Zeiss Planar 50mm (which is relatively cheap but excellent) if I was on a budget and wanted a workhorse to complement a DSLR.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Have you loaded an M or Barnack Leica?
I own 6 rangefinder cameras and their sister the KonicaHexarAF, and the only one of them I don't use, is a Leica, a IIIF RD. It's small and beautiful, but it's the heaviest one of them, and I prefer a more comfortable loading system, so I stopped using it a few days after getting it...
If you're sure you want a Leica, from what you say I'd get an M3 if your main lens is a 50, or an M2 if it's a 35... They can be found cheaper than a new Bessa, but apart from the weight and the loading system, they go up to 1/1000th instead of 1/2000th...
By the way, I used and use Nikon SLRs too, long ago, and RFs just 5 years ago...
Good luck with your purchase!
Cheers,
Juan

 

[madNbad]

M6 either a classic or TTL which ever is in the best shape for what you're willing to spend. There are a bunch of them out there, (only more M3s' were made) and for someone new to Leica, easier to load. It will work without a battery and there are a ton of lenses out there. Downside is finder flare under certain conditions and compared to the M2/3 a crowded viewfinder. The Barnacks are nice but old and the film leader needs to be trimmed to facilitate loading. The M5 is nice but parts to repair the meter are begining to be difficult to find, same with the CL. If you're not worried about condition, an M6 can be had for not a lot of money. Add a nice 50 and you're set.

 

[Ljós]

Consider an Olympus 35 RC also, or any other quality fixed lens rangefinder, there is a number of choices around the 40mm focal length. Very good 40mm lens, found the viewfinder experience overall more pleasant than the Leica CL. Very lightweight and small, great complement to your SLR gear.

The CL has lots of things going for it, and I really wanted to like it, but ultimately it did not convince me. And since you tend to be hard on your gear, the CL might not be the best choice.

Btw, I praised on of your pictures in a different thread. Guys and gals, check out his flickr and homepage. Good stuff there!

 

[KoNickon]

I think as a journalist you should consider a camera you can load really quickly, and unload really quickly -- that would be the Konica Hexar RF, because it's autowind and auto rewind. No bottom to remove and hold in your hand; no spool to deal with -- open the back (which stays attached), pull the film leader out the correct length, and shut the back. You're ready to take frame 1 in about a second.

Notwithstanding what people seem to think, the shutter is very quiet (goes to 1/4000), and you can fire off pictures about as fast as you can push the button. It accommodates framelines from 28-135mm. Excellent and accurate meter.

 

[BillBingham2]

I'd recommend that you get a Nikon rangefinder rather than a Leica.

They load just like your F, back comes off....second nature to you I bet.

The direction of focus and aperture adjustment is the same as your F lenses. Important if you prefocus as your bring the camera up to your eye.

If cost is an issue get a S2, a Nikkor 50 of your choice and either a Nikkor or CV 28mm. All Nikon RFs are a 1:1 viewfinders so you can shoot with both eyes open. The S2 finder is fullframe for a 28mm.

The wheel focus on the Nikon rangefinders makes focusing a 50 or wider a breeze.

If you can afford a bit more an S3 a bit newer shutter speed dial (like the F). Digging deeper into your pocket will get you an SP. For the mix of glass you are using (longer on the SLRs) IMHO it's over kill for what you want to do.

I think you will find the innards of the original S3 and SP very close to the F. A fine source of info on Nikon RFs

https://www.cameraquest.com/classics.htm

Nothing wrong with Leica (LTM or M) but switching between Nikon SLRs and Leica RFs wasn't as smooth as Nikon to Nikon for me.

YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary)
but you fun will not
either way Rangefinders ROCK!

B2

 

[mfogiel]

So,
1- you will want a 35mm and 50mm lens
2- you want silent operation, reliability and speed
Body:
Best choice: Leica M7 0.72x
Second choice: Leica M4 (or M4P if you can stand multiple frames), or M2
Lenses:
I would go with two solid f2.0 lenses, like Summicron 50 V3 or higher and Summicron 35 pre asph or asph. If you want to exaggerate, you can reach out to f1.4 modern Leica lenses, but in my opinion you need to see if you can justify the cost. Even these basic lenses will make you happy as they are beyond anything Nikon has ever made in these focal lengths.
As to 40mm, I would only get the C Summicron or Rokkor, if you really want to try something on the cheap - in this case I suggest to couple it with an M4P or M4-2 and have the base of the lens filed, so that it will bring up the 35mm frame.

P.S. It is clear you have never tried a rangefinder with a wide angle lens. If you did you would not think so highly about Nikon, although WA photography on a RF has some framing issues.

 

[KoNickon]

Following up on my earlier post, there's a Hexar RF for sale in the Classifieds right now for $400. Can't beat that.

 

[De_Corday]

Thank you all so much for your very comprehensive replies. You've given me all a *lot* to think about.

So far it seems like when I'm making good money, an M6 ought be in my future. At the moment, the CL or an M2 seem like the right move. But some of you have made solid points about film transport...

Bill, I've played around with a Nikon RF, an S2, and while it is quiet and small and light, the lack of parallax correction kind of got to me. Not a deal-breaker, but close. At the moment, though, I have one that I can borrow from a mentor in a pinch.

As for the Hexar, I'll have to check it out. I've overlooked it because things like a motor drive are beyond the scope of what I'd need (and I have an unfair tendency to associate electronics with a lack of ruggedness... particularly unfair given my love of the F3), but you make a solid case for it. I need to find one to handle.

Again, for the folks warning me against slow loading and the like, I don't intend for the camera to be an action-journalism camera, and don't foresee myself ever being on a job with only the rangefinder... it's more the first camera to take out of the bag, when being discrete. That sort of thing.

I don't know why I'm deciding to complicate things further, but... how does something like the Canon P stack up to everything we've discussed?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I'd rather take Bessa R, not Canon P, if cheap way.
If you need to load fast, take M4-2, it black, "modern" and not so expensive.

 

[Findus]

Evan, if it does not *have* to be a RF in any case, and since you already have some nice Nikon lenses, you may also take a Nikon N80 into consideration. It is very silent and discrete and you will be immediately familiar with the handling. Just a thought. This would save you lots of money to spend on film instead, too 😉

 

[ruby.monkey]

It's a small detail but the M6TTL and M7 have shutter speed dials that turn the wrong way, just like your Nikons. Just one less difference to worry about.

 

[Corran]

Bill, I've played around with a Nikon RF, an S2, and while it is quiet and small and light, the lack of parallax correction kind of got to me. Not a deal-breaker, but close. At the moment, though, I have one that I can borrow from a mentor in a pinch.

Then get an SP! My favorite 35mm camera, ever. Parallax correction, better RF/viewfinder than Leica (IMO of course, compared to my M6 0.85x), and just a gorgeous and quiet camera. A decent user SP can be found for ~$800, less than an M6 typically sells for and not much more than an M3. No meter but if you are lucky you can find one of the Nikon meters for the shoe that still works. I have one and it is awesome and fairly accurate (I've shot chromes with it).

 

[Clark.EE]

Hexar?
Please discuss.....