_goodtimez
Well-known
As for Leicas I have a few: 2x M3, O-series, III C, II F, M6 and yes, an MP.
Honestly the MP is a good one. However in the past I had 2 M6 consecutively and I found that the shutters were harsh and sounded dry. A few years ago I purchased a cheap M6 and I must say that I found a good one with an increadible smooth shutter. So much so that I have a chock every time I fire this camera. The MP I have is not that smooth in compare but still a very nice camera I think.
Honestly the MP is a good one. However in the past I had 2 M6 consecutively and I found that the shutters were harsh and sounded dry. A few years ago I purchased a cheap M6 and I must say that I found a good one with an increadible smooth shutter. So much so that I have a chock every time I fire this camera. The MP I have is not that smooth in compare but still a very nice camera I think.
Tzelet
-
If you want an MP, get one. If you don't... don't!
Indeed! I'll buy you a beer (or a nice bottle of Chablis!) next time you're in Scandinavia. I've spent too much money getting a "cheaper" version of what I really wanted. And images had nothing to do with it. In the last week, I've put 15 rolls of film through a Zeiss Ikon I bought for 300 Euros. So far, the images are every bit as good as the ones I get with the MP. But the Ikon really makes me appreciate the finder and rangefinder patch of the MP. The Zeiss finder is huge, but size isn't everything.
jplomley
Established
Just for the record, I've a pair of M7's, and no problems with either. Just saying....before the M7 bashing begins
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
Leica M6 (classic) vs. MP
Leica M6 (classic) vs. MP
The "Good, Bad, & Ugly" between a Leica M6 (classic) and an MP:
1. The MP has a brass top; the M6 is zinc alloy;
2. The MP has the “Leica” script engraving; the M6 has no engraving (early M6 camera tops from Wetzlar are engraved “ERNST LEITZ WETZLAR GMBH”);
3. The MP has the classic M3/2 RW mechanism with vintage style knobs; the M6 has the M4 style with the slanted crank with M4/5/7 style knobs (none of these are plastic);
4. The MP has the RF condenser lens (taken out in the M4-2 run); the M6 does not.
5. Different body coverings (neither are extraordinary).
6. The black MP cameras are painted (and the paint is ‘designed’ to rub off); the black M6 is anodized black chrome.
7. MP has more modern meter circuitry and the meter may be a stop more sensitive in low lighting conditions.
8. The MP generally has a smoother film advance mechanism compared to an M6. This is not a result of anything Leica changed as to materials, but rather fine tweaking of the steel gears.
9. The MP is fitted with a separate eyepiece with a plastic cover installed. Every M camera prior has the eyepiece molded into the body with a diopter that screwed in. The new eyepiece is not sealed and will allow dust into the finder over time; Leica now seals the eyepiece at the factory, but it is still an inferior design compared to any that preceded it.
10. The hot shoes are different (with different mounting) - neither is better or worse than the other.
The sound differences noted in some of the posts hereinabove are due to the differences in top plate metals.
I have owned and used both. In spite of the differences, functionally they are the same camera with the same build tolerances; both have the same shutter mechanism and the same RF (with the condenser lens added in the MP – less than a $200 upgrade through DAG – more if done through Leica).
My recommendation: Send your M6 in for a CLA and have the RF finder upgrade installed at the same time. At the point you get it back you’ll have a great camera to use and ~$3,000 left in your pocket when compared with 'upgrading' to a new MP.
Leica M6 (classic) vs. MP
The "Good, Bad, & Ugly" between a Leica M6 (classic) and an MP:
1. The MP has a brass top; the M6 is zinc alloy;
2. The MP has the “Leica” script engraving; the M6 has no engraving (early M6 camera tops from Wetzlar are engraved “ERNST LEITZ WETZLAR GMBH”);
3. The MP has the classic M3/2 RW mechanism with vintage style knobs; the M6 has the M4 style with the slanted crank with M4/5/7 style knobs (none of these are plastic);
4. The MP has the RF condenser lens (taken out in the M4-2 run); the M6 does not.
5. Different body coverings (neither are extraordinary).
6. The black MP cameras are painted (and the paint is ‘designed’ to rub off); the black M6 is anodized black chrome.
7. MP has more modern meter circuitry and the meter may be a stop more sensitive in low lighting conditions.
8. The MP generally has a smoother film advance mechanism compared to an M6. This is not a result of anything Leica changed as to materials, but rather fine tweaking of the steel gears.
9. The MP is fitted with a separate eyepiece with a plastic cover installed. Every M camera prior has the eyepiece molded into the body with a diopter that screwed in. The new eyepiece is not sealed and will allow dust into the finder over time; Leica now seals the eyepiece at the factory, but it is still an inferior design compared to any that preceded it.
10. The hot shoes are different (with different mounting) - neither is better or worse than the other.
The sound differences noted in some of the posts hereinabove are due to the differences in top plate metals.
I have owned and used both. In spite of the differences, functionally they are the same camera with the same build tolerances; both have the same shutter mechanism and the same RF (with the condenser lens added in the MP – less than a $200 upgrade through DAG – more if done through Leica).
My recommendation: Send your M6 in for a CLA and have the RF finder upgrade installed at the same time. At the point you get it back you’ll have a great camera to use and ~$3,000 left in your pocket when compared with 'upgrading' to a new MP.
kipkeston
Well-known
It's nicer than the M6 beyond a doubt. But insignificantly.
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
Let me clarify one thing - I am very happy Leica is still making [film] cameras. And they are still great cameras that will most likely outlast the availability of the film they are designed to carry.
My point in sighting the differences between an M6 classic and an MP is to illustrate it amounts to a hair splitting exercise comparable to, although I dare say the differences here are greater, to that of an M4 vs. an M2-R.
These differences make for an emotional decision (causing a person to spend three or four times the cost of one M6 classic) rather than a rational one (simply replacing/adding a $200 part).
Nikkor AIS
Nikkor AIS
I shot about five rolls of film with my MP today. It just works. And so damn solid. Bright viewfinder, smooth advance. Love the meter. It is absolute mechanical perfection.
Gregory
Gregory
Last edited:
Turtle
Veteran
Bill you missed out the reworking of the shutter. More resilient curtains and some changes in design that result in less likelihood of giving uneven exposure at 1/1000. Supposedly under reduced tension too. My gut tells me the majority of the difference in noise is not due to top plate material. Its the same when the body is open too....
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
Your 'gut' would be wrong.
I mean no offence, but I have read all of the material on this, discussed the differences with Leica reps and techs, and I know of no change whatsoever to the shutter.
I am not infallible and admit I could be wrong, but I don't think so.
If you placed an MP topcover onto an M6, changed out the rewind system, changed out the body covering, and added the RF condenser, you would have what essentially amounts to an MP (accepting the metering system).
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
The wonders of nature, the acts of God (if you believe!) - are awesome!.....cameras and other fine tools definitely are not!
Mackinaw
Think Different
From Erwin Puts review, " The shutter curtains are more light tight and the occasional light leaks of the older shutter curtains are now extinct. Even more important is the improved mechanical geometry of the shutter. As has been explained in the M7 review the shutter curtains have an acceleration and deceleration moment, when speed is building up and the curtain mass must be braked. Here we have an area of variable geometry and a careful redesign of the rollers and springs and braking elements has resulted in a very even movement over the travel length. Occasionally users have noted very small darker bands at the sides of the frame as a result of the shutter movement being too slow at the start and stop moments. With the new design there should be no problem."
http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/MP/page28.html
Jim B.
awilder
Alan Wilder
The internal tweeks to the meter, shutter, advance and finder are indeed nice making the MP their last best effort in a metered mechanically timed camera (some say the M5 is actually their best effort). Further improvements are unlikely, only special editions or finishes. Frankly, the price of a new one is out of reach for most and as an ex-user of a special edition MP, I don't feel it's improvements are worth cashing in your equipment to raise the money, even for a basic black model. However, because the black finish is quite prone to brassing, used MPs are "reasonably" priced with minor brassing at 2.1-2.3K. That's not too unreasonable if you must have their ultimate and you plan to shoot a lot of film for the next few years. For me, the M6 "classic" at around 1K is still a best buy for a metered M.
aizan
Veteran
several years ago, i asked dag how much certain m6 modifications would cost. putting in the one brass gear that the mp has is $30. flare-free upgrade is $190. m7-style lens release button (and presumably mp also) is ~$45. body covering installation is $15, but you have to supply it yourself. i'm not sure if leica sells coverings to individuals, but i get the feeling they don't sell them to independent repair shops. same thing as top plates, i guess.
i prefer the iso dial on the m6, so i'm planning on revamping one in the future. some earlier mps had it, too.
i prefer the iso dial on the m6, so i'm planning on revamping one in the future. some earlier mps had it, too.
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
Some of the changes referenced were already present in the M6 by its termination. But as to the rest, I will defer to Mr. Puts.
Vincenzo Maielli
Well-known
I own a silver chrome MP. I s the first Leica M, after last M4 production, that shown a similar (maybe not identical) build quality as M4, and the same rangefinder construction. For these reasons, i have choosed the MP.
Ciao.
Vincenzo
Ciao.
Vincenzo
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
This is simply not correct by any measure. The MP is put together in an assembly-line by unskilled employees. The M4 was put together by highly skilled artisans.
The MP has the same 'right or replace' finder found in the M4-2 (and in every M camera since). The oft talked about (flair resistant) condenser was removed half-way into the M4-2 run and added back starting with the MP. The MP 'build quality' is indeed inferior to that of an M6 - If you want to argue contrarily, no rational case can be made that the MP ‘build quality’ is better by any comparison. The MP eyepiece is substantially inferior to any preceding it.
"I knew the Leica M4; the Leica M4 was a friend of mine. The MP is no M4." Lloyd Benson (well, sort of)
sepiareverb
genius and moron
No real way to know unless we can send some M3/M4 era employee to the factory to watch an MP and M7 assembled, and then trust their report. M cameras are all different. I've owned nearly twenty M cameras over the years and they are all individuals. I shoot M7s, M8s, MPs, an MP3, an M5 and an M4. I've used and sold M7s, MPs, an M4-2 an M3 and M2s. I keep the cameras that I like, and really there is no difference in function between an M6 and an MP. Ergonomics sure, but they both have the same range of shutter speeds and ISO. Pick the one that looks good to you, keep the ones that feel right.
dreamsandart
Well-known
To those saying the MP is 'more or less' a M6... couldn't disagree, and agree more...
Leica has a history of making minor changes, that make major differences in their body versions (the one exception being the M5). The 'up-grades/changes/variations' between and within the models of M3, M2, and M4 were minor apart the viewfinder magnification change M3 vs M2/M4. Leica 'purists' did go a bit crazy with the plastic advance tip and front body controls of the M4, but in use they made little real difference. The double stroke to single stoke advance, quick load feature, and angled rewind were major, but looking back not deal breakers. (and I don't want to get into the M5, which Leica engineers let all the stops out on)
When the M6 came out I sold my chrome M4 with the happy thought of an M4 with a built in meter. But in many minor ways (which added together) it was not an M4 ( finder! its more than just a condenser lens that was left out, self-timer, zinc, engravings, steel gears, body covering... fit and finish ) - a bit of a disappointment. Yes, a good camera that did the job and I used for close to 2 decades, it just didn't have that 'classic' Leica 'feel' for me.
An then the MP... its 'back to the past' and my original thoughts of what I'd hoped for that M6. Maybe the best way to put it is - its a refined M6 - everything is made and designed better, from the viewfinder, meter, shutter, brass and engravings, smooth action of the shutter release and advance, and even the retro parts don't seem out of place, fit and finish look to be a step or two in the 'refined' direction with CNC machining of parts (getting closer to my M4 ;-)
If you are wondering which is the better camera, for all those that say the M6 is the same, given the choice between the two without thought of condition, an M6 being 20+ years old and in need of repair/CLA, cost differences... would anyone really pick an M6?
As a camera to use, and the end of the manual M-series film camera line its just about perfection in evolution Leica design style.
Leica has a history of making minor changes, that make major differences in their body versions (the one exception being the M5). The 'up-grades/changes/variations' between and within the models of M3, M2, and M4 were minor apart the viewfinder magnification change M3 vs M2/M4. Leica 'purists' did go a bit crazy with the plastic advance tip and front body controls of the M4, but in use they made little real difference. The double stroke to single stoke advance, quick load feature, and angled rewind were major, but looking back not deal breakers. (and I don't want to get into the M5, which Leica engineers let all the stops out on)
When the M6 came out I sold my chrome M4 with the happy thought of an M4 with a built in meter. But in many minor ways (which added together) it was not an M4 ( finder! its more than just a condenser lens that was left out, self-timer, zinc, engravings, steel gears, body covering... fit and finish ) - a bit of a disappointment. Yes, a good camera that did the job and I used for close to 2 decades, it just didn't have that 'classic' Leica 'feel' for me.
An then the MP... its 'back to the past' and my original thoughts of what I'd hoped for that M6. Maybe the best way to put it is - its a refined M6 - everything is made and designed better, from the viewfinder, meter, shutter, brass and engravings, smooth action of the shutter release and advance, and even the retro parts don't seem out of place, fit and finish look to be a step or two in the 'refined' direction with CNC machining of parts (getting closer to my M4 ;-)
If you are wondering which is the better camera, for all those that say the M6 is the same, given the choice between the two without thought of condition, an M6 being 20+ years old and in need of repair/CLA, cost differences... would anyone really pick an M6?
As a camera to use, and the end of the manual M-series film camera line its just about perfection in evolution Leica design style.
matt335
Well-known
Yes, it's bloody awesome. Once you forget the hype and wank about the branding and snobbery some associate with it and it becomes just an extension of your eye then it becomes an even more awesome camera. What I love the best about it is just this. Forget its a brand name and just take photos. That aside though it's built to last and endure, but it has the finesse as you'd expect. Perfection in mechanical engineering. I have only used mine every day for three years so far and it's totally reliable. It never misses a beat. Ask me again in 20 years. It's black, its unassuming and easily concealed and non-threatening. Yes this is a cliche but it becomes you and you forget it's a camera.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
It's a very nice camera. 'Awesome'? A word that is overworked to the point of meaninglessness. 'Perfection'? Of course not: nothing made by man is perfect. The smoothest Leica I've ever owned? No, that was a black paint M3, but as I like 35mm and 75mm lenses, and a meter, and a Leicavit, I'll live with the (very slight) loss. The best film Leica I've ever used? Quite probably. But the truth is that most Leicas are pretty good, and even the worst I've had (an M4-P) was still better than most cameras I've owned when it was new, and it is smoother now than it was when I bought it almost 30 years ago.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.