trading up to M7 (and some alternatives)

[patrickallo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm considering the following move:

- replace both my M2 and my D-Lux 3 with an M7.

 

At the moment, the D-Lux 3 is only used for some quick shots. While I love the look and feel of the M2, I feel that I'm just too slow with it (after 18 months of use).

 

Here are my main considerations:

pro M7: speed of use when compared to the M2. (I don't mind the battery-dependence)

pro M2: look and feel when compared to the M2 plus lovely clutter-free finder.

neutral: I only shoot 50 and 35, so the additional 28mm frame on the M7 is irrelevant

 

I also have an alternative plan I'm toying with:

- keep the M2, and replace the D-Lux 3 with the X100

 

The main benefit of this plan is that I can dedicate the M2 to Black and White and use digital for colour. The main downside is that this might drive me away from film (in small format at least).

 

Any additional thoughts? (I know, it's just a matter of personal taste, but I'd just like to know if I'm overlooking some "crucial" issue)

[Advertisement]

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

[earleygallery]

Hi,

 

If I may say so you seem a little confused in your choices/options.

 

Why is the M2 so slow for you? How do you meter? Do you use 'sunny 16' ?

 

The M7 may be quicker in some cases with aperture priority, but then again the metering pattern it uses won't suit every situation so you still need to think about exposure.

 

I'm not sure what you'd gain by selling the D lux and buying an X1, other than better quality digital images of course. If you only use the D lux for occasssional snaps, do you need anything better?

 

As for B&W with film and colour with digital, maybe that can work but then will an X1 be enough camera for you? Are you experienced enough with RAW and digital workflows to acheive the same quality as you do with colour film? Do you process your own film? Maybe keep the M2 and add an M8 or 9.

 

I think you need to work out for yourself what is most important to you, for the type of photography you prefer. Also think about what it is that makes the M2 slow for you.

[patrickallo]

Thanks for the reply.

 

Here are a few clarifications:

- The M2 is mostly too slow because I use the VC2-meter. Since I often shoot inside, Sunny 16 is at best a partial alternative. From my experience with other camera's, I believe that aperture prioritity + memorizing exposures suits me.

- I'm not considering the Leica X1, but about the Fuji X100. The advantage when compared to the D-Lux is double: viewfinder and better high-iso performance.

 

- Last addition: I process most of my black and white film myself, and will also make wet prints (no lack of experience there).

 

- Then, with respect to the M8/M9 option: I find the M9 too expensive, and getting the M8 will leave me without wide-angle.

 

I do realize that both alternatives I'm considering are very different. It basically comes down to the choice between all film for serious shooting versus combination of film and digital for serious shooting.

[andybarton]

I have used an M2, M7 and MP. I still have the M2 and MP.

 

The M7 is by far the quickest camera, if you have to meter. Half pressing the shutter locks the metering if you want to meter with more control that just point and shoot, but the meter is extremely good in any case.

 

If you don't need to sell the M2 to buy an M7, keep both.

[xalo]

+1 for keeping the M2, if you can. The built and the uncluttered finder are unique (to name just this). I sold mine a while ago, got an M6, same framelines as M7 (0.72). Besides the 'invisible' 28, it also has frames for 75mm coming up with the 50, and the 135 coming up with the 35. Today, my MP from 2005 (3-frame finder like M2) is not as smooth as my M2 was or my M3 is. Do you use one of the coupled Leicameters or a VCII meter?

 

I do not know the M7, except for the speed dial in manual mode: turns the opposite direction of the one on M2.

 

B&W film has some exposure latitude, meaning you don't need to nail exposure every time to the half stop (granted, not recommended for all applications). The main hindrance to me for speediness is feeling unsure about exposure and/or focus. Following instinct lead often to much better results than no results, due to hesitation...

 

I pondered (sometimes continue to do so) about a digital RF upgrade and finally am happy with my D-Lux 5.

 

Cheers,

 

Alexander

[fotohuis]

The M7 is by far the quickest camera, if you have to meter. Half pressing the shutter locks the metering if you want to meter with more control that just point and shoot, but the meter is extremely good in any case.

 

I can only say the M7 is the fastest Leica RF and indeed the light meter is very good.

 

If you carry a spare set of batteries the mechanical times of 1/50 and 1/125 only is hardly any disadvantage. Just to mention the advantage: Quarz controlled shutter, very acurate.

[andybarton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The shutter is stepless too, so will give half or third stop increments for the shutter speed when on Auto.

[pico]

I've used the M2 for years, then several M4s and finally got two early M7 cameras (then the M9).

 

I've never used auto-exposure before and can confidently say that the M7 has excellent metering and it's a pleasure to use auto. I use one with an Abrahammson RapidWinder and the other with the most excellent Leica auto-wind. It is a fast handling system, and I am told that is very quiet.

 

If you buy a used model, it may not have the upgrades. I'd buy new or be sure it is a later model or an upgraded earlier model.

[tgray]

I've been very happy with my M7. Never owned an M2, but do have an M6, which I'm probably selling soon. They are all good cameras. If you want auto exposure, it sounds like an M7 might be in your future. You can also look at a Zeiss Ikon, but used M7s are starting to go for pretty cheap.

[Stealth3kpl]

Keep the M2, ditch the meter.

Indoors use an incident meter for the darker areas and keep the camera set to that (just try a test film doing this and see what you think - I think you'll be surprised. Just make sure you're not going to under expose anything).

Outdoors, sunny 16 (sunny 11 really), and if in doubt give it an extra stop. I've just spent 2 weeks in Alaska guessing exposure (Portra 400, camera set to 250/11 or 16 if very bright snow) All the photos have come out great. A pro 'round here today volunteered how good the exposures look so I took great delight in telling him I guessed them all (and that they were taken on a £50 OM-1n - he's been looking at the latest Canon 5D @ £3000 ).

 

Really, just set the camera up for ambient light and shoot away. There's nothing simpler or quicker. When I try to use auto (OM-2n) I get the occasional underexposure due to the reflective meter. I love manual!!

Pete

[kokoshawnuff]

I have an M2 and M3, often used together on extended vacations. I just got an M7 (.85x mag) and honestly I'm ashamed to say I haven't even considered putting a roll of film through either the M2 or M3 the last month. For tricky lighting situations or when you really want the speed, the a built in light meter (and aperture priority) is terrific. Also the auto exposure is wonderful for long exposures—no counting down on bulb or fiddling with a shutter release cable.

 

A good M2 can be purchased for under $750 these days, so if you wait until you can afford an M7 without selling the M2, they would compliment each other very well.

 

also...If you prefer uncluttered frames because you only shoot 35/50 I've heard of some techs that can remove the other frame lines.

[SteveYork]

I've owned an M4 and M7 (closest to your considerations), as well as an M6 and MP, and now an M5 (along with the M7).

 

In terms of just getting the picture, and if you specialize in candids, the M7 can't be beat. Lightening quick and the rangefinder patch on modern Ms is a dream.

 

But the M7 did make me a bit lazy, and it turned me into a bit of a 'happy snapper.' Not the most intuitive controls either. And the shooting experience isn't like an older M.

 

But go ahead and try it. See if you like it. You won't know unless you try it. Armchair analysis doesn't work.

 

Also consider a Zeiss. I understand they're pretty nifty cameras too.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Patrick,

 

Welcome to the Forum.

 

Why not consider getting a separate handheld combination incident/reflected light meter & learning to use it. It doesn't take too long to master & the results can markedly increase the accuracy of your exposures & therefore the quality of your negatives/transparencies resulting in decidedly better pictures.

 

I think part of the reason people prefer the exposure meter in an M7 is it reads DX Codes. Many cameras which read DX Codes bias the exposure setting in the camera as a factor of those little black & white squares on the film cartridge. These encodings began to be used in the 1980's when electronically controlled cameas began taking into account the actual fim speed & latitude of a given film shown by these little squares as opposed to the nominal speed/latitude printed on the box. It's not a big deal to get a copy of the codes & adjust your meter to whatever the speed/latitude of a given film actually is.

 

Some films have the speed & latitude it says on the box. Some are different. All produce good negatives/transparencies. Proper exposure determination coupled w/ utilization of the biasing codes on those little squares can sometimes result in a better quality negative/transparency.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[patrickallo]

My main worry is indeed that I would miss the M2, but then again, I just need one body that fits my style best.

 

I guess I'll start with applying my usual criterion: go to the shop, and check out how it feels when I manipulate it. (this is what allowed me two years ago to pick the M2 above an M4P)

 

As to the suggestion of using a handheld meter instead of the VC2, I'm not really fond of doing so. I do use a (somewhat large) handheld meter for medium and large format, and also used it with my M2 before I got the VC2, and to me it just feels like one more thing to lug along.

[xalo]

'morning patrickallo,

 

I omitted reading your second post prior to contributing above, sorry.

 

For an aperture priority film RF that would allow you to keep the M2, there might be another option: perhaps you could consider the Bessa R line, with the 2A, 3A, 4A, which mainly (only?) differ in finder magnification.

 

The R2 has an isolated frame for 50mm and combined 35/90. Also, the Bessa' speed dial turns in the same direction as the M2's (support for the reflexes - not needed in AE, though...). The Bessas are not as handsome as the Leicas, sure, but seem to work very well - my Leica dealer preferred to sell them over the Zeiss (he mentioned a higher return rate for those). I handled a 4A in a shop, found it great and almost bought it, if not for lack of immediate need.

 

Best,

Alexander

[cbretteville]

I tend to use my M7 mostly these days when shooting film. I often carry a Gossen Digiflash (used to have it's sibling the Digisix) for incident metering or when using meter less cameras. I like the size of the Gossen, it is really tiny (75mm x 50mm x 25mm) and weighs in at whooping 40g including a 2032 button battery. I used to use a Leicameter on the M4-P I had some years back, but the Gossen is so much better and easier to use. There are other hand-held meters to, like the Sekonic 308s, also small but not as small as the Gossen.

 

As others have mentioned the meter and ease of use of the M7 is superb. The shutter is really quiet.

 

The only thing about the M7 I find really, really annoying is the way Leica has implemented the software around the DX reader. If you only shoot DX coded cassettes at box speed, you're fine. If you want manual control, the M7 takes a bit of getting used to. Any change to the speed determined by the reader is seen as exposure compensation which causes a read dot in the finder to blink constantly. As an indicator to inform me that I've set the +/- EV, this is perfectly fine, but it also applies if you override the DX reader by setting the ISO speed manually. I like to expose Tri-X at ISO320 so if I dial that in and switch the camera on, the DX reader reads the speed off the cassette as ISO400 and starts blinking.

 

Another issue with the optical DX reader is that it sets ISO5000 for cassettes that have too lightly coloured lables (white/yellow etc) and the lables extend into the DX area. If the casette has a non reflecting surface it sets the speed to ISO100. And when you set the speed to what you have rolled or what it is, the infernal dot starts blinking. The white surface issue is no problem if you have the older electrical reader, but it again has other issues.

 

I can hack the DX codes to make the camera read what I want it to read, but this extra hassle could have easily been avoided by allowing us to think for our selves and mess up if we set the ISO incorrectly on the back.

 

As for the D-Lux 3, I owned it's brother, the Panasonic LX2 for a while and never really liked it. I sold it and bought a 2nd hand LX3 (brother of the D-Lux 4) which I found a lot better and still have, but it is blown out of the water in all aspects of use - except size - by the X100.

 

Cheers,

Carl

[patrickallo]

Thanks all for the feedback.

 

Meanwhile, I popped into the shop where they have a secondhand M7 on sale. Played with it a bit, and was happily surprised.

 

It feels very different from my M2, in fact closer to the Nikon FM2-T I own as well, but not in a bad way. Suffice it to say that it's very tempting to make the move...