Franek_ Posted September 15, 2015 Share #21 Posted September 15, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) But it can cut both ways. Imagine a subject which has strong back lighting. Whilst on auto, the meter is tricked or the photographer fumbles for some exposure compensation, my finger has slowed my shutter 3 stops and I already have the shot . I take your point though. pete Of course it can cut both ways, and I get You. But, for me in such situation it's faster to point the camera in other direction and let it measure the light in the place where there is no that strong light and after that recompose and take the shoot of the subject. But, it's very subjective and lays on one's style of work. I've never get used to using my right hand to something other than putting the shutter button. That's why I like Olympus OM film SLR's, there is shutter speed setting 'in the lens', so You can use Your left hand to focus, set the aperture and set the speed. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Hi Franek_, Take a look here From M4 to......?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ramarren Posted September 15, 2015 Share #22 Posted September 15, 2015 After having owned and used most film Ms up to the M6TTL, my favorite is the M4-2 I have now. I'm very pleased with it and will keep it for a long time to come. Its simplicity, its features, and its viewfinder (hotshoe flash trigger, M4 viewfinder, lack of adornments) make it the film M I've liked the most. That said, with most of my other cameras (which have metering and lots of automation available), I use aperture priority AE most of the time. So if I buy another Leica M film body, I will go for the M7 to have that same capability. For an external meter, I have several iPhone apps (Lumi, Light Meter, Fotometer Pro, etc) all of which work well, none of which replace my Sekonic L328 for either ease of use or simplicity in operation. If I were buying a new meter now, the Sekonic L478D is what I'd go for—much more customizability allow it to be made even simpler to use. G Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinchers of peril Posted September 15, 2015 Share #23 Posted September 15, 2015 If I had the money to make this decision I think I'd go with the MP. I currently have an M6 and I really do like having a meter in the camera. I also like that if the batteries went dead the camera (minus the meter) is still fully functional. Without battery the M7 is very limited on shutter speeds that you can use. The reason I got an M6 vs an MP is simply because it is less expensive. So if you're looking at the MP I think you'd be very happy with it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franek_ Posted September 15, 2015 Share #24 Posted September 15, 2015 In fact, spare batteries in the wallet or pocket is not a big deal - financially and if You consider the space that they occupy... Battery life in M7 is over 100 rolls. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinchers of peril Posted September 15, 2015 Share #25 Posted September 15, 2015 But what about roll 101 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted September 16, 2015 Share #26 Posted September 16, 2015 But what about roll 101 Let me loosely quote what Winogrand replied when asked whether he is ever worried about missing photographs when changing film: "When I change film, there are no photographs." 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted September 17, 2015 Share #27 Posted September 17, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) So on to the question - bought new both the M7 and MP are the same price; I'm talking plain Jane, not a la carte. Why new? To ensure the MP finder on M7. To get Leica engraving on top plate on the MP. Simplicity with the MP, auto with the M7. Which would you chose and why? Regards Paul I have considered adding an M7 (I have a TTL and an M4) but two things have put me off - the freely rotating shutterspeed dial and the blinking meter diods if one pushes/pulls (which I do with most of my rolls). Paul, you'll have to decide what's important to you - aperture priority, engraving, rewind, etc etc - it's all very personal. But I am quietly wondering why you'd spend an unnecessary amount of money on something that, as a matter of functionality, can be had for less in the shape of the M6. True it won't out of the box have an MP finder but you won't know until you've used it if you'll need it. Many on this forum say they are not bothered by any flare. And if you are bothered by flare, then the cost will be (a lot) less than the difference of a new MP/M7. You can even send the camera to Wetzlar to have engravings added, if you want that. And if you're worried about not being able to leave your kids with a functioning camera, don't. In the perspective of a few decades, an M6 will last as long as a new MP. If you add a service to the cost of the M6, plus the MP finder upgrade, you'll very likely still not reach the price of a new MP/M7. That leaves more for film and lenses. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReturningToFilm Posted September 17, 2015 Author Share #28 Posted September 17, 2015 (edited) Thanks Philip- that's very wise advice ......darn it the IT gremlins lost the rest of my post! Food for thought. Plenty of different angles to consider from. Are the Internet M7 electronics and M6 corrosion issues overblown in your view? Edited September 17, 2015 by ReturningToFilm Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madNbad Posted September 17, 2015 Share #29 Posted September 17, 2015 I can't comment on the M7 electronic issue but having owned an M6 TTL with zinc oxidation, I would say it's pretty much overblown. Mostly there is a scattering of bubbles under the chrome finish ( black or silver) occasionally, a more sever case affecting the entire top plate. There are a number of post in the forum concerning the issue with some M6s. Same thing with finder flare, to some it's a minor annoyance, for others a major problem. Phillip mentioned the finder upgrade and some upgrades are better than others. The factory will do the full MP finder upgrade which includes multi coated windows in addition to the condenser mask. It is worth shopping around should you decide to go with the M6. The original M6 would be like using your M4, with the addition of an internal meter. The TTL meter adds a central dot for proper exposure and the larger shutter speed dial turns in the same direction as the over/under arrows. They are great cameras and I love mine (almost as much as the M2). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asiafish Posted September 17, 2015 Share #30 Posted September 17, 2015 I guess I'm the first one here to suggest the lovely M5. TRUE spot meter, not fat spot meter. Shutter speeds in the finder and a speed dial that overhangs the front. The M7 is not the apogee of the film M, the M5 is. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted September 18, 2015 Share #31 Posted September 18, 2015 Good suggestion on the M5. I've used both the 5 & 6 for many years. Both are fine, but the 5 is special. Instead of an M7 I added a Zeiss Ikon ZM - best finder of the bunch. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted September 18, 2015 Share #32 Posted September 18, 2015 At one time or another over the years I've had every model of rangefinder-equipped Leica M. In most cases, in pairs. The only pair I have kept through it all is the 1st ones I bought, which are M4's. Never found the built-in meters that much quicker than the MR4 or more accurate than a good handheld. If I were you with one M4 and wanted a second body I'd get another M4. YMMV. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted September 18, 2015 Share #33 Posted September 18, 2015 +1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antonio Russell Posted September 18, 2015 Share #34 Posted September 18, 2015 I would use the M4 with a small incident meter and also get the M7 for the aperture priority. The M7 in aperture priority has to be a lot faster to meter a scene... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted September 18, 2015 Share #35 Posted September 18, 2015 The M7 in aperture priority has to be a lot faster to meter a scene... I thought it might also, but it didn't turn out that way in practice. Unlike matrix/evalutative metering, the M meter is easily "fooled" in many situations, eg when the subject is much smaller than the metered area, and darker or lighter than the surroundings. Merely composing, focusing and accepting the meter reading led to many gross errors in exposure, so I found myself using exposure lock often, and that was a time-waster. In manual mode, or using a separate meter, I tended to take a reading off a middle tone and as long as the light didn't change I stuck with it or shifted shutter speed or aperture according to my experience if I felt the subject itself needed more or less light to be rendered as I wanted it to be. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antonio Russell Posted September 19, 2015 Share #36 Posted September 19, 2015 I thought it might also, but it didn't turn out that way in practice. Unlike matrix/evalutative metering, the M meter is easily "fooled" in many situations, eg when the subject is much smaller than the metered area, and darker or lighter than the surroundings. Merely composing, focusing and accepting the meter reading led to many gross errors in exposure, so I found myself using exposure lock often, and that was a time-waster. In manual mode, or using a separate meter, I tended to take a reading off a middle tone and as long as the light didn't change I stuck with it or shifted shutter speed or aperture according to my experience if I felt the subject itself needed more or less light to be rendered as I wanted it to be. Obviously you need to know how to use the built in meter, but once mastered I believe it is faster ... and this is coming from someone who uses a handheld incident meter almost exclusively. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matlock Posted September 19, 2015 Share #37 Posted September 19, 2015 I find the M7 meter covers most (but not all) situations. I use a hand held Sekonic if needed. But the convenience of the built in meter is one of the M7's great features. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReturningToFilm Posted September 19, 2015 Author Share #38 Posted September 19, 2015 Wandering around Marseille today with m4 and handheld- can see built in would be less cumbersome but most of the readings are sunny 16 compatible, so maybe don't need a meter at all lol! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted September 19, 2015 Share #39 Posted September 19, 2015 The built in meter is a huge advantage, and aperture priority an even bigger one. Of course you have to know how to use the built-in meter in tricky lighting situations, but this also holds true for a handheld meter. I shoot some 4x5 and use a combination of incident and spot meter, but I use the M7 because it is fast. There are plenty of times when I do some street shooting in full sun, and I see something interesting out of the corner of my eye inside a restaurant or under a vestibule. This is when the M7 will save the moment. I also have an MP, which I find stunningly beautiful, but the M7 is more practical. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gberger Posted September 19, 2015 Share #40 Posted September 19, 2015 Let me suggest you consider the difference between using the internal meter in an M7 vs the meter in the MP. In the M7, you set the aperture you want, taking into account whether or not you desire a shallow or an extended DOF. With AE, the aperture remains fixed, and the exposure varies, and there's no twiddling of the aperture to obtain the desired exposure. In the MP, you set the desired shutter speed, and then manually vary the aperture to obtain the desired exposure. Two different beasts. Also, with the M7, you can lock in a desires exposure and then recompose. Not possible with the MP. With the M7, you'll have both AE and the ability to pretend it's an M4. Get a incident / reflective meter (such as the Sekonic 308S) and you have the best of both worlds - - - a reflective meter in the M7/Sekonic, an incident meter for shooting where you select both aperture and speed, just like the M4. BTW: Since 1946,I've owned a IIIc, M4, M6, M6TTL, M7, and now a a la carte MP. IMO, for sheer shooting experience, the M7 tops the list. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.