Why MP over M7? (or vice versa)

The problem with the shiny black paint in my mind is that it captures ALL the fingerprints. I had to get used to the smudges on my BP camera. I didnt like it but it went with the territory.
 
i don't have either one, currently I have M6, but when I buy another M film camera it's going to be an M7 for one reason, because it has AE.

Last month I shot an event, a show where my daughter was a part of. Brought my M6 and my Canon dslr. I wanted to use my M6 for photographing the entire show but I also brought my dslr and several fast lenses for a back up. I was expecting a low light stage photography but turned out the lighting was not really low and the lighting on the stage changed quickly all the time that it's difficult to shoot with manual exposure. After struggled for several shoots cause I had to keep changing the exposure, I put my M in the bag and took out my dslr. Set the dslr at AV (aperture value) and be done with it.

It's horses for courses, and maybe a dslr will be more convenient for that type of shooting ... and it is more convenient to use dslr... but to me, when I buy another M film camera, it's gonna be an M7.

Bob
 
I am a sturdy advocate of AE in my 35mm cameras, as I normally use them for street type of photography, therefore an internal meter which obliges you to fiddle with the speed dial sounds like a nonsense to me, hence I use M7's and ZI + Bessas for other magnifications. However, recently I have had a chance to appreciate the retro rendering of low contrast older Leica lenses, so I have completed a lens line with this low contrast high resolution look, and I am thinking to use it also for a specific type of slower photography, like architectural detail, landscape, still life or portraits, where a handheld meter is actually more indicated. I have thought about a specific camera for this, and eventually decided on a silver M4. All my cameras are black, and this one - coupled with the silver lenses, will be an exception, a "heritage" Leica for me... so I guess the MP will have to make happy someone else...
 
I've had an MP and now have an M7. My biggest criticism of the M7 is that there is a 2 (?) second delay from turning it on to being able to shoot in AE mode. Otherwise it's perfect.
 
Chris101 said:
That, and my biggest Leica hero has an MP. I vote MP.

And I have neither. So there.
Click to expand...

I know who you mean, but...I can't recall the name, but I do recall there was special limited edition of 500 MP's with his name engraved on the top plate and the frameline lever was missing, and I think the framelines were limited to 50 and 90....plus, they were a hue of red painted....
 
Hey Rodney! Nenad Bojic's got a red Leica with his name on it? Kewl!
Heh - Oh, wait, that old coot. ;):cool::p Too bad the chick got in the way.

But you can clearly see the MP with a 50 'Lux in the lower right side.
Keeping my priorities straight,
 
mfogiel said:
I am a sturdy advocate of AE in my 35mm cameras, as I normally use them for street type of photography, therefore an internal meter which obliges you to fiddle with the speed dial sounds like a nonsense to me, hence I use M7's and ZI + Bessas for other magnifications. ..
Click to expand...

I find the opposite. I find that meters that decide at the last minute as you press the shutter to fire your snap shot a problem because you do not have time to over ride it. With manual you tend to constantly adjust as you move and may a lot more attention to the light. As a result, as long as you have a solid reading locked in based on shadows if you swivel 90 degs to shoot something that is suddenly backlit at least you will have shadow detail. I have found my exposures consistently better with my MP than with my EOS3 under difficult lighting and thats because I am paying more attention and know what is being metered (bec I specifically metered it earlier). With colour I would go with AE bec highlights are more the factor, but with B&W its all about shadows. Everyone is different, but I was amazed to find my exposure improving beyond measure with the MP (because I had to change my approach). What I do now, when met with a snap shot, is shoot the first frame at my last reading and then reassess for the second if I have time. If I have time to assess the light in the first place then I do of course. The result is that I am not caught out by reflections, backlight, bright walls, windows, dark alleys in shade with the sun overhead etc nearly as much because I already have a good shadow value locked in. Its amazing how little it really changes, whereas your meter will tell you very differently if pointed straight at the scene as a whole. Just my approach!

As to the OP:

MP a touch less tall. Feels slightly different as a result of the finish, vulcanite etc.
MP shutter dial turns the same way as the old M6 and before leicas.
Mechanical shutter. No biggie, but might be in years to come when Leica M7s start going wrong and costing an arm and a leg to get electronics replaced in Solms; IF there is a solms. Manual Ms are widely supported by a plethora of techs who can work on the shutters.
If you prefer AE, you must get a M7...
Think about what you like to do/need to do and make your choice as the decision is relatively simple.
I don't buy the BS about build quality differences. That may be about feel more than build.
 
The battery argument ALWAYS brings out the people who say, "How hard is it to carry spare batteries"?

Well, if you only ever carry one camera bag and wear one set of clothes, or have a perfect memory and always transfer batteries from one bag/pocket to another and always replace your spare batteries when you put the new ones in the camera, it's no problem.

I'm not like that. I've already been called a moron by one of the less civil members of the forum because my cameras end up in different places (studio, study, hall...), but (a) some people run their lives on rails while others don't and (b) you can remember where your cameras and batteries are and still be a moron.

In other words, it comes down to self-knowledge, honesty and preference. I prefer the MP. I prefer the feel, the battery independence and shutter speed dial that goes the traditional way. But I can see why some prefer the M7, and they're welcome to their preference: in some ways it's a better companion to the M8.2 than the M8, because of the shutter speed dials. I'm glad Leica makes both (and the M8.2 as well).

Cheers,

R.
 
Tim Gray said:
I drive a manual too. I love it. I would not trade it for an auto. I would trade it for a manual, which is exactly like my manual, but in addition to the full manual experience, I could switch it into auto mode in traffic. As far as I know, A true auto+manual does not exist. Tiptronic is not a manual gear box in my eyes.

The M7 works absolutely fine in full manual mode.
Click to expand...

The Nikon FM3a is an auto+manual camera with a hybrid shutter. It only requires batteries for the meter and AP.

Leica could do very well to make a camera like this to my mind, with the hybrid shutter in an MP type housing.
 
Roger Hicks said:
The battery argument ALWAYS brings out the people who say, "How hard is it to carry spare batteries"?

Well, if you only ever carry one camera bag and wear one set of clothes, or have a perfect memory and always transfer batteries from one bag/pocket to another and always replace your spare batteries when you put the new ones in the camera, it's no problem.

I'm not like that. I've already been called a moron by one of the less civil members of the forum because my cameras end up in different places (studio, study, hall...), but (a) some people run their lives on rails while others don't and (b) you can remember where your cameras and batteries are and still be a moron.

In other words, it comes down to self-knowledge, honesty and preference. I prefer the MP. I prefer the feel, the battery independence and shutter speed dial that goes the traditional way. But I can see why some prefer the M7, and they're welcome to their preference: in some ways it's a better companion to the M8.2 than the M8, because of the shutter speed dials. I'm glad Leica makes both (and the M8.2 as well).

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

I would have to agree with this. Batteries though cheap, are just another thing that you need. I could sell camera that needed batteries to operate, but I would have a harder time parting with the mechanical ones.

There's something wonderful about the camera that is never on or off, and just works when it needs to.
 
Benjamin said:
The Nikon FM3a is an auto+manual camera with a hybrid shutter. It only requires batteries for the meter and AP.

Leica could do very well to make a camera like this to my mind, with the hybrid shutter in an MP type housing.
Click to expand...

I have an FM3a and yes it's a very good camera but compared to my M2 it's shutter is so noisy, in fact it's way noisier than other Nikon SLR's that I have and I don't know for certain but wonder if this is because of the hybrid shutter. In very quiet shooting conditions it sounds like a portcullis has dropped.
I have owned an MP and had the use of an M7 and for me either would be a very very welcome addition, however given the choice I would probably go for the MP again as I believe that it's the closest to my M2. I live in hope :)
Regards

Harry
 
Yes, I've never used an FM3a but I have FM2's and an FE amongst others. They only thing that put's me off about the FM3a is somewhat similar to why people dislike the reversed dial of the TTL M6 and M7. Being that I can use an FM2 like the back of my hand/in the dark, the 'A' at the top of dial where 1/4000th should be has really put me off.

Strange you say that it's louder though. Even in aperture priorty? Electronic shutters are usually quieter. Maybe not so great in a Leica then.

I would also go with the MP, as it's basically a new M2 to my mind.
 
I don't think there is much to debate at this point. It is a personal choice and the OP must find his/her own answer. The fundamental differences have been covered and it comes down to preference. Of course the m7 has manual mode too and the shutter issue is not a biggie, so perhaps it is a case of 'if you don't have strong opinions, it wont matter much if anything.' I am sure if I ended up with M7s instead of MPs/6s I would be just fine. But thats not the path I took, in part because the appeal of cheaper used bodies of the M6 classic and before would be useful to me.
 
Hi there,
New to the forum, but not so to Leica. Silly discussion this thread, but what would life be without 'em? My favourite is definitly the M7, basically because I bought a brand new one at a shop clearance for under 1500€ a few months ago, and I'm still smiling!
If I want to go back to basics, I can always take my M2 out.

Keep up the good work
 
I've had both and have sold both. I was trying to decide which to buy, couldn't decide so bought both. Both were great and I used them a lot, carrying them around together. I tried using the M7 for slide and the MP for black and white but it didn't always fall like that. Then I tried to decide which to keep, couldn't decide so sold both. I'm much less stressed now with just an M3 and an R3A.
 
I had the M7, traded for the MP with an RFF member. Not sure who got the better deal :)

I enjoy my MP for its solidness and the fact that it is not so high-tech, but sometimes miss the AE. But then again, when I really need AE, there's always the M8 and/or my other SLR(s).
 
it's all a bit of hair-splitting, isn't it? i think *nottturtle* said it well: it's a personal thing. which can only be decided by the OP's own use. so, it's the old saw: buy one, try it, sell it if it doesn't work for you, keep it if it does. you'll know soon enough with actual use. and if you buy used, then you'll likely not lose much money on the path. oh yes, it's big fun too, being able to use the different models, obviously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom