With near 'mint' M6's currently so cheap .. what are the pros and cons of the camera?

Keith

Keith

The best camera is one that still works!
Local time
8:46 PM
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
19,242
I seem to have a selection of rangefinders that I'm seldom using and I'm not quite sure why this is. Ikon, R4A, M2, M3 a Nikon S2 and a couple of Leica screwmounts just sit in the cupboard while I invariably seem to pick up my 'evil' OM or move up to MF for the bulk of my serious shooting. :confused:

I often do feel like actually using a rangefnder and shooting with an M but can never quite seem to decide whether to go with the M3 or M2 ... and often as not after deliberating endlessly which will do the better job I decide it's all to hard and chose the OM-2 or OM-1 ... the Zeiss and the Bessa never seem to enter this process for some reason. This is a strange dichotomy because I really do like the feel of my M2 as I do my M3 ... I also enjoy shooting with my M8 when I get the chance and believe that Leica got it pretty right over all with their balance of simplicity and good ergonomics with the M design!

I'm currently musing over the possibility that I'm muddying the waters somewhat by having all these choices and maybe reducing it all to one competent, versatile, metered M mount body may resolve the issue! Which brings me to the M6 and which particular model may cover my needs! I seldom shoot wider than 35mm and although I do own 25mm and 15mm lenses I don't use them much but would tend to keep the R4A anyway for the occasions when I just might get the urge because I realise the Bessa has no peer for these focal lengths. For someone who shoots mainly in the 35mm to 50mm range with an occasional foray into 90mm what M6 body is ideal ... is finder flare an issue ... how good is the metering etc etc? An MP would be nice but I really don't want to spend that much money and I doubt that selling the Ikon along with the M2 and M3 would provide me with sufficient capital to actually buy a low milage example!

Long term M6 owners, please share your thoughts. :)
 
I have M2, m3 and the M6. I think the M6 is the best package. My experience is with the M6 classics. It just gets everything right, if RF's are your thing. But it seems to me, watching your evolution as a photographer over time, that RF's aren't your thing. RF's make you guess at things that I see as important to the kind of stuff you like to shoot.

Have you considered that maybe you don't reach for any of the RF's because you just prefer SLR's? The OM can do anything you could ever want to do with a 35mm camera.
 
Keith, in case you realized you want your 0.85x M7 back, I am sorry, but it is not on sale.... In fact, if you do not wear glasses, this is probably the best camera that would replace your collection, would retain the Leica feel and have all the conveniences of a decent VF, accurate focussing and a no hassle exposure system. However, there is another way of looking at things. I use this M7 with 50mm lenses only (rarely I mount a 90mm), the ZI with 35mm lenses only (most of the time with the 35/1.2 Nokton for the low light) another M7 0.58x for the 28mm lenses, the R4A for the 21 and 25mm lenses. So each camera is linked to a FL where it excels. You might use your OM's for the makro and tele work, and the rangefinders coupled to specific lenses for specific jobs.
 
Perhaps it won't help your decision, but having owned M6, M6TTL x 2, I've moved to M7. I preferred the TTL to the Classic because I liked the ease with which you could change shutter speeds using one finger whilst still holding the camera to my eye. I also preferred the LED arrangement. The meter system leaves a certain amount of decision-making to the user, but is soon adapted to. In the end, I moved to the M7 as it is more versatile IMO with its aperture priority mode, as well as the 'M6 mode'. All these bodies had .72 finders and I haven't found flare a particular issue. I use 35/50/90 and fit a x1.25 magnifier for use with the 50 and 90. I find the latter a major benefit and results are much more consistent in terms of focus accuracy. BTW, I wear glasses.
For some users, the shutter speed dial difference between the TTL/M7 and the M6 seems to be a bit of a problem and it may limit your choice. However, M6s tend to be cheaper (in the UK at least).
I hope this is of help to you.
 
Pickett Wilson said:
I have M2, m3 and the M6. I think the M6 is the best package. My experience is with the M6 classics. It just gets everything right, if RF's are your thing. But it seems to me, watching your evolution as a photographer over time, that RF's aren't your thing. RF's make you guess at things that I see as important to the kind of stuff you like to shoot.

Have you considered that maybe you don't reach for any of the RF's because you just prefer SLR's? The OM can do anything you could ever want to do with a 35mm camera.
Click to expand...


Agreed ... the needs of my particular style of photography generally seem to be being met more effectively with an SLR ... which is obviously why it tends to be my first choice I guess. I find the rather vague framing of rangefinders annoying a lot of the time!

Occasionally though I do photograph in situations where being able to shoot hand held at a shutter speed that has an OM struggling is very useful ... but because I don't seem to be completely comfortable with the Ikon and have a preference for on board metering, there are three cameras in my collection that are not really meeting these needs. My eyesight these days can make focusing an SLR quickly in poor light tricky when there's not a lot of time to muck about ... in these conditions, which admittedly I don't shoot in often with film, a rangefinder is definitely more effective. Because of these attributes ... I'll always want one good RF in the cupboard whether I use it frequently or otherwise!

But it needs to be the right camera!
 
Keith said:
...and maybe reducing it all to one competent, versatile, metered M mount body may resolve the issue! Which brings me to the M6 and which particular model may cover my needs! I seldom shoot wider than 35mm...

...For someone who shoots mainly in the 35mm to 50mm range with an occasional foray into 90mm what M6 body is ideal ... is finder flare an issue ... how good is the metering etc etc?...

Long term M6 owners, please share your thoughts. :)
Click to expand...

Hi Keith, I have a very early M6 Classic (1985) and am the original owner. After owning it almost 25 years it hasn't given me any problems at all. I actually had Youxin Ye take a look at it when I brought my IIIf to him for service a few years ago and he basically handed it back to me saying it was in great condition and didn't need any service. (I admit to being a light shooter and babying my cameras :p).

I remember my thought process well at the time (similar to yours) when I bought the M6: I wanted to keep it simple, small, and minimalistic - one body, one lens. That camera - along with the v4 35 Summicron - felt so organic to me, that I will never part with that combination. I have the .72 finder - for me, it works great with the 35, and not so bad for the 90 (2,8 Tele-Elmarit).

Although the 90 frame area is small, it is very usable. However, for the 90, I recently bought the SGVOO BL finder and it makes shooting with the 90 that much more fun. I don't find it a problem focusing through the VF then shifting to the BL (I'm a left-eye shooter).

Prior to the M6, I had a Leica R4 outfit, then switched that to a Hassy outfit w50/80/150 lenses which i enjoyed, but, I felt a bit overwhelmed with the gear and wanted to pare things down which brought me to the M6 - my first RF camera - and have been in love with Leica RFs ever since.

I don't have any issues with the vf flaring problem (or never noticed it enough to cause me concern) and never any issues with my meter. Everything is working fine. I do like to shoot with a 1/2 case attached as the camera feels more comfy in my hands that way. Later, I added a 90 2,8 Tele-Elmarit (mentioned above) and a 135 f,4 Tele-Elmar (all 39mm filters along w/the 35 Summy) and have basically stayed with that kit since the 80's.

I have a black M6 body BTW, which I am partial to.

Good luck on your decision. Hope this helps.

- Ray
 
mfogiel said:
Keith, in case you realized you want your 0.85x M7 back, I am sorry, but it is not on sale.... In fact, if you do not wear glasses, this is probably the best camera that would replace your collection, would retain the Leica feel and have all the conveniences of a decent VF, accurate focussing and a no hassle exposure system. However, there is another way of looking at things. I use this M7 with 50mm lenses only (rarely I mount a 90mm), the ZI with 35mm lenses only (most of the time with the 35/1.2 Nokton for the low light) another M7 0.58x for the 28mm lenses, the R4A for the 21 and 25mm lenses. So each camera is linked to a FL where it excels. You might use your OM's for the makro and tele work, and the rangefinders coupled to specific lenses for specific jobs.
Click to expand...



It's ironic isn't it ... if I'd persisted with that M7 I just may have grown into it! :p
 
I have 2 M6, one black and one chrome, an they're perfect for the 35mm focal length or wider. I only use 35mm and 21mm on the two body, for 50 the M3 is still my go-to body, just because it feels right to me.
 
Kieth, off topic, but...the finder diopter for the Nikon FM-10 will fit the OM cameras (or Canons, or Pentaxes...just about anything I've found). I use a "0" diopter on my Om cameras (that's actually a +.5 because Nikon finders are -.5 from the factory). I wear glasses, but that little bit of positive diopter really sharpens up the image for me.
 
My early model M6 (second hand) has been marvelous. I also have an M6TTL 0.85 (bought new), handy for fill flash, but it needed three services before the rangefinder was spot on. I have an R3M for using the 75mm, where the 1.00x viewfinder is rather nice.

But it's the M6 classic that I prefer. I often take it out with 50mm and 25mm lenses. I use the outer edges of the viewfinder as 25mm framelines which works reasonably well. It's the camera in which I have the most confidence. I must say though, that having similar cameras with shutter dials that are opposite to each other is a pain.
 
Keith, perhaps you should try box-system. pack everything else to cardboard box and put it somewhere for storage, leaving only one body and few your favorite lenses on shelf ready to be used. your "what currently easily available" system usage probably increases significantly :)

edit: oh well, missed the point about M6, but here it goes anyway...
 
Last edited:
silvalis said:
Well, if you want to get rid of that uncomfortable Ikon... :D
Click to expand...


The trouble with the Ikon ... and sometimes it seems to happen more often depending on the position of my stars obviously ... is losing the finder patch at critical moments. I know a few others have complained about this also!

I haven't put a roll of film through the camera in months now!

The other thing that draws me to an M6 is the metering system ... I gather it's similar to the M8's (?) which I like a lot for it's simplicity!
 
Last edited:
Keith,

of course I don't know you and much less even what you drive to do things. However, let me just reflect, what I understand from your mail. If I do get to personal, forgive me and just ignore the mail.

My impression is, that you want to be prepared for everything and as well want to go for high quality. Choosing the right tool can be difficult at times, as we don't always know, what comes up. In addition, if cameras are not just a tool for you (which is very likely ;) ), then the emotional aspects for camera bodies comes in, too. I think, you got to solve this part first.

There's no silver bullet. You already have a great, versatile rangefinder: the Zeiss Ikon. Functionally, it supersedes all others you have, let alone the Bessa 4A. Find out, why you tend to use the OMs. Find out also in how many of the occasions the ZI would have been sufficient. Leave alone the MF gear for a year. It just makes it too complicated for you now.

Cheers
Ivo
 
Cons: An Ikon is much better in most tangible ways, it's definitely faster to shoot with
You may spend $1000 only to find your camera needs a $125+ repair for something that Leica should have fixed 20 years ago
Pro: It feels good in small hands
 
Keith, maybe you've just been so used to the OMs and have more confidence in getting the results you wanted. I also came from SLRs (Nikons) which I use for years but once I got the hang of RF I never looked back. I had a lot of wasted shots in my 1st few rolls taking shots forgetting about focus are the most common as well as with lens cap on. I almost gave up but I know I need to keep on trying, get out of my comfort zone and explore a new way of taking pictures. I had the same problem with my 1st RF a Bessa R3a. It's not because it's a bad camera but rather the focus patch kept on disappearing when I need to take the shot just like your ZI. My poor eyes find it so difficult to align the patch and just got so much relief when I got an M2 then an M3. It's heaven and earth difference for me.
 
Photon42 said:
Keith,

of course I don't know you and much less even what you drive to do things. However, let me just reflect, what I understand from your mail. If I do get to personal, forgive me and just ignore the mail.

I don't have any problem with anyone giving me advice or expressing their opinion


My impression is, that you want to be prepared for everything and as well want to go for high quality. Choosing the right tool can be difficult at times, as we don't always know, what comes up. In addition, if cameras are not just a tool for you (which is very likely ;) ), then the emotional aspects for camera bodies comes in, too. I think, you got to solve this part first.

Cameras intitially were the attraction that got me into photography ... then eventually I realised it was the image I was attracted to. I still do like and admire cameras as tools though as I've valued high quality tools in other areas in my life!


There's no silver bullet. You already have a great, versatile rangefinder: the Zeiss Ikon. Functionally, it supersedes all others you have, let alone the Bessa 4A. Find out, why you tend to use the OMs. Find out also in how many of the occasions the ZI would have been sufficient. Leave alone the MF gear for a year. It just makes it too complicated for you now.

I think the silver bullet syndrome is interesting but I don't feel that it has affected my choice of cameras of late. MF is important to me ... it's the format where I seem to be most creative ... I think I would abandon 35mm first! :p

Cheers
Ivo
Click to expand...


Thanks for the input Ivo. :)
 
i like my m6s, i use them with a 1.25x leica magnifier and can use the 50 and 35 framelines with ease. the rf patch is not as contrasty and flares easier than the m3. the led meter display is quite intuitive and is pretty accurate for even slides.

maybe you can try limiting urself to the m3 and a 50mm for a month and see how that goes? maybe rfs aren't suited to ur photographic style? i was in a similar situation and ended up selling all my film slr and mf gear cause they don't fit my style.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom