M8 or M7 or even M6?

[bussta]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Do I need a digital M8?

 

For years now i have literally been thinking of Leica cameras every day, visiting this site on a regular basis drooling over the images I see here and those lucky enough to own a real Leica M.

 

My issue is that I can't even think about affording a M9, so next best thing would be the M8.2 in digital terms, I borrowed one from a friend a while back and took some shots of which I posted here, I enjoyed using it, being seen with it the whole Leica experience, but had to give it back (

 

Now i've caught the bug and want one of my own. I could either save up and buy a used M8.2 or go the opposite direction and get a M7 or even back to a M6. I like the automation of the M7 but the one thing that holds me back is the the fact that its not digital.

 

Going down the film M route:

 

Financially I would have to fork out for the camera & lens, then a Suitable scanner, be it Epson flat bed or dedicated 35m scanner, then film, the processing costs, it all adds up

 

Going down the M8.2 digital route:

 

I would be buying an obsolete camera that's very electronic and relies a lot on circuitry and electronics, need UV filters for lenses and has the crop factor issue, how long will the camera last and be usable? in the long term?

 

what makes me think of the M7 apart from the marginally cheaper price is that I have a little Lomo that I took to NYC and took some pics that I was really happy with, mainly because I was conscious on the number of frames I shot so took my time in selecting the right moment, also that little waiting game to see the final product. This makes me think i'll enjoy the actual process of taking pictures more than chimping every minute at the back of a digital camera.

 

For me I would use it primarily for personal use, but also for work shooting reportage "behind the scenes" images on the cover shoots I art direct for the magazine I work on. Print wise suppose the pargest I would print to would be A3, would a good 35mm neg scan hold up well at this size compared to that of a M8 file?

 

The immediacy of digital appeals to me from a PP angle and from the ability to instantly change ISO on the fly which you can not do on the M7, it would mean planning what speed film I want t use before shooting.

 

How easy is it to PP scanned negs? compared to Raw files, do Raw files ultimately hold more information and provide more latitude in correcting errors in capture?

 

Decisions decisions decisions

 

Your input would be greatly received

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Nikkor AIS]

My suggestion is get a user M6 and a 35 mm lens and start shooting with the M system. Check out http://www.keh.com as they have several that might fit your budget. In the beginning there is nothing wrong with shooting XP2 for B+W which you can have developed at Walmart and scanned put on a disk for $5.00. Or if you want color try some Ektar 100 . Both are very affordable. Shoot a couple rolls a day and your learning curve with the M system will be steep. From there you can decide which route to go. Keep it simple. Get in the game and start making images. As far as IQ I still say a properly exposed negative/slide is every bit as good as any 12-24 Mega Pixel camera made today if your end results are prints. Good luck with your choices.

 

gregory

 

SmugMug Photo & Video Sharing. You look better here.

[tgray]

The immediacy of digital appeals to me from a PP angle and from the ability to instantly change ISO on the fly which you can not do on the M7, it would mean planning what speed film I want t use before shooting.

 

How easy is it to PP scanned negs? compared to Raw files, do Raw files ultimately hold more information and provide more latitude in correcting errors in capture?

 

RE: ISO:

 

It can be annoying to be stuck at one ISO. If you are shooting a bunch, you move through a roll faster, so this is less of a concern. 33 frames shot and you suddenly need to go to ISO 400 from 100? Just forget the last 3 frames and switch. If you are only shooting 1-5 frames a day or something and have the same roll in your camera for a week (or more) it can be a hassle.

 

I tend to shoot a lot of Tri-X for this very reason. It's fast enough for most occasions, and I can still use it in broad daylight. If I really need to slow it down, I can use an ND filter. It's better than having Plus-X in there and needing extra speed. I typically stick to 400 speed films since they give me more flexibility, and only load in the slower films when I know I'm going to burn through that roll relatively quickly.

 

Having a second camera really makes this easier since you can make sure you have a fast and a slow film in different cameras.

 

 

Re: PP:

 

If you are ok with film and all that goes with it (processing, scanning/printing), then I'd have no worries about PP for scanned negs. Depending on the errors of your capture, then you don't need to worry about correcting them in PP with film.

 

If you underexpose a shot on film, there is a bit you can do, but you are often stuck with no detail in the shadows that you are trying to save. On digital, you can keep cranking on them and then run some noise reduction. Here, film loses a bit in my mind.

 

On the flip side, unless you are shooting slides, film doesn't really care that much about overexposure. You might not even notice +1/2 stop of overexposure on B&W or color neg film. Actually, color neg film seems to thrive on moderate overexposure. So you don't have to worry about restoring highlights with film in the same way.

 

So, while exposing, err on the side of overexposure, and you won't have too many problems with PP. Again, this is for negative film.

 

This of course assumes you have a decent scanner in which you can make sure you don't blow out the highlights in the scanning stage. Minilab scans can be very useful, but they can blow out highlights sometimes. The only correction then is to rescan. A Nikon Coolscan V/5000 is a great scanner, and you might be perfectly happy with an Epson V700.

 

 

I'm very happy with my M7 and M6 setup. They are great cameras, and scanning is not that big of a pain. I process all my own B&W. If I'm feeling lazy, I shoot C41 film and get it dev'ed and scanned for me. It's really not that expensive when all is said and done if you only shoot 100-200 rolls/year.

[Nikkor AIS]

If your shooting inside in low light T-max 3200 is the hard to beat. With proper push processing in T-max soup you can push it to 50,000 ISO. With a 35 1.4 Summilux on a M6 available light becomes available darkness. Developing your own negs is very easy in your bathroom with a minimum of supplies. I also use the Nikon 5000 scanner and the with the mag resolution it makes files larger than my Canon 5D2 and Nikon D3 captures when shooting raw.

 

gregory

 

SmugMug Photo & Video Sharing. You look better here.

[bussta]

Thaks all for your replies, this digital age has tained my view on how good film actually is die to digital being so instant, it;s funny though as every photo that I love and admire has been taken on film, be it from Holga's, SX70 Polaroids etc

 

Looking through the Magnum Magnum book I don't think there is 1 digital image in there and nearly every shot blows you away.

 

Think i'll try and save for a M7 - christ I could get an M7, 35 lux + 5DMKII & lens for less than a M9 body and have the best of both worlds.

 

Damn you Leica! you are the bain of my life

 

[photophile]

I shoot M4-2, M6 and M8. Coolscan V. Most prints are at Super A3 or 17X22 on epson 3800. The uality, in a properly exposed film is as good if not better than the M8 - and the M8 is excellent, including B&W at 1250 ISO with LR3. If I were you, I'd go with the M6 and like waht the others have said... go out and shoot lots of images. Good Luck. BTW - a CV lens is a good choice most of the time if you are trying to keep to a budget. CH

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Some other things to consider;

 

Are you intending to shoot mostly colour or mostly B&W? (B&W is much nicer shot with film IMHO and really easy to process yourself. If you shoot colour C41 negs have them processed/scanned at a 1hr type place like Snappy Snaps, the low res CD is fine for proofing and web use, and then scan the keepers at high res yourself - that's what I do).

 

Do you need the immediacy of digital? (if you do then it is going to be more convenient for you day to day, if you don't then the difference in price between an M6 and an M8 will pay for a lot of film).

 

How many photos/rolls of film would you shoot on average per month? (if you're not a heavy user then the cost of film and processing is negligible. If you're a heavy user shooting thousands of photos a month, putting them on the web etc, then digital makes a lot of sense).

 

One thing, if you go down the film route and later change your mind, assuming you buy a nice s/h M6 or M7 you should be able to recoup your outlay should you decide to sell. Chances are the M8 will gradually fall in value as it gets older. So if you're really not sure then a film camera might be safer to try first. OK you have the scanner but the Epson is a fine all rounder and you can scan your Lomo photos too!

[Guest AgXlove]

IMHO, get yourself a nice, clean used M3 or M6, along with a similar condition (rated "8+" or higher) used 35 Summicron and/or 50 Summicron.

 

"8+" rated pieces will have some cosmetic wear, but not to the point of looking bedraggled. Some rated "8" are not too bad, but used eqiupment rated lower than "8" will look pretty worn & ratty. Expect the mechanical condition of the camera body or lens to be pretty much on par with its cosmetic condition.

 

The M3 and M6 are very nice cameras and will serve you well. The M6 has some conveniences that the M3 doesn't have (built in light meter, single stroke film advance, upgraded film loading, upgraded exposure counter) which may well be worth the extra cost.

 

As far as lenses, the pair of 35mm & 50mm focal lengths will cover alot of photographic situations - probably 80-90% of possible scenarios. You pretty much can't go wrong with an M3 or M6 and a lens set of 35/2 and 50/2.

 

Camera West ( LEICA M :: Camera West ) has an very good selection of used Leica M cameras and lenses. The guys there are very knowledgeableabout Leica gear and they are great to do business with. I highly recommend them.

[earleygallery]

Re. M3 - your widest framelines are for 50mm so you need an external finder or 'goggled' lens if you want a 35mm.

 

The M2 is better IMHO with 35/50/90 individual frame lines.

[Pangur Ban]

Step 1: Get the M7, use the auto-exposure at first, with XP2 developed and scanned commercially. Take lots of photos and get some decent prints made of the best shots. Try some colour film too.

 

Step 2: Use the M7 for manual exposure, the rest the same as above

 

Step 3: use HP5+ or equivalent - get it professionally developed and scanned

 

Step 4: get an Epson V700 or equivalent and scan your negatives. Learn about adjusting contrast and brightness. Print the best.

 

Step 5: get a Paterson developing tank, some DD-X, stop and fixer and develop your own negatives then scan them.

 

Lots of fun ahead!

[norsk]

If you want to shoot reportages you need a digital camera today !!! The M8 ist good enough for it - but:

 

When you can spend the money buy a M9. I think the quality of the pictures of that are so good. It is not necessary to buy another camera in the next years.

 

Myself I like to take pictures on film and digital. OK - I use "only" different Nikon´s. And use also a Nikon COOLSCAN 9000 ED. A very good tool. But I afraid, the pictures of a M9 are really better!

 

Or buy an older M for small money, for film. But you will see: You want to use also digital. Maybe begin with a used M8 a n d for example a M6.

 

Greetings

Heinz

[smb]

Go with the M6 for the Leica experience. It can always be sold or traded up. If you are certain or have intentions that some day you will buy the M9 spend the extra and buy a coded lens.

[bussta]

OOh M6 or M7 it is!, am leaning toward the M7 for the auto function, am I correct in thinking that the M6 & M7 are exactly the same sized bodies?, for some reason the M6 looks smaller (not the non TTL version which is apparently a tad smaller) but the M6 looks a bit smaller, think it must be an optical illusion though, something to do with the M6 logo. What does also appeal to me about the M6 & M7 is that they are smaller than the M8 in size and easier to carry not having the controls & screen to scuff on the back.

[tgray]

The M6 is slightly smaller than the M6TTL and the M7. You can see it in the extra 2mm-ish above the viewfinder window when looking from the front. It really doesn't make much of a difference in the real world.

 

I'd get the M7 or the M6 (classic). I seriously doubt you'll need the TTL flash functions of the M6TTL, and you can save a couple bucks compared to the M6TTL. The M6 has a TTL meter for exposures, it just won't do TTL flash metering like the M6TTL or M7. The M7 is great as well.

[garygsandhu]

Ge an M8. They're selling cheap(ish) and you won't lose much if you resell in a year if you change your mind. Spend as much as you wan on used lenses-- they won't depreciate much further.

[Guest maddoc2003jp]

The M7 is very fine camera and has the big advantage of an electronically controlled shutter, that is nearly step-less in AE mode, quite useful for color-slides, IMHO. I use mine in parallel to a meter-less M4-P. An M7 with a nice 35mm or 50mm lens (f/2.0 or f/1.4 depending on your needs) and your are done for a long time. Start with chromogenic BW film like XP2 or BW400CN and also some color-slide film and enjoy the results. These films can be processed by commercial labs and also scanned, you can always add a scanner later.

 

Classic silver-halogenide BW film is best when self-developed and the final step is printing in a dark-room. I think only when you see your first silver-gelatin BW print then you understand what all the fuss is about ...

[ezc203]

As the proud, relatively new owner of an M8, I would strongly recommend it. A used M8 goes for under 3000 USD and is an exquisite piece of machinery. Pair that with a 50mm Summicron or Summilux (depending on your budget) and you have a great starting combo. From there you can expand your lens set or upgrade to an M9.

 

But IMHO the M8.2 is rather silly: a new M8.2 goes for 6000 USD and even a used one is about 4500; for that kind of money I'd much prefer an M9 at 7000 USD. Personally, I'm using my M8 religiously right now and waiting for the M9's availability to be stable and then upgrading to one.

 

Hopefully, that helped with your decision. All the best,

Edd

[alun]

Bussta, My own take would be either an M7 or -- if you wish to save a few hundred pounds/dollars -- an M6TTL. And then find a decent pro-lab -- even if mail order -- which will develop and scan to CD at a file-size of your choice. That's my standard and I have found this to be economical and time-saving while also avoiding all the hassle of scannning personally.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[SteveYork]

Don't be too logical when it comes to Leica. Deciding on what Leica to own and use is partially an emotional decision. What does your gut tell you?

 

All those cameras will take the modern, up-to-date optics.

[earleygallery]

I bet he wishes he never asked now