Jaimiepeeters Posted April 8, 2012 Share #1 Posted April 8, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) hi guys recently I found myself happy to purchase an M4-2 from my co worker in really great condition. There's no lightmeter in it as you well know so I'm using sunny/16 - a Sekonic handheld lightmeter and an iPhone app 'Lightmeter" to meter the light. Some might say that the M4-2 is no competition to the M6.. but is that really the case. I know they are half the money but some say the only real difference is the buit in lightmeter. Should I go for the M6 with built in lightmeter or should I learn to guess the light conditions or even buy a Voightlander vc meter? Maybe you can tell me what I have in my hand regarding the M4-2..? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 8, 2012 Posted April 8, 2012 Hi Jaimiepeeters, Take a look here I have an M4-2, must I get an M6?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jlindstrom Posted April 8, 2012 Share #2 Posted April 8, 2012 Not an expert, but from what I've understood the meter is the biggest difference. Another difference can be framelines, depending on M6 vf magnification. The meter in M6 only makes shooting faster, but then again light doesn't usually change that fast so using incident lightmeter with your m4-2 can be just as good. //Juha Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFGANG Posted April 8, 2012 Share #3 Posted April 8, 2012 I have a M6. I took out the batteries and instead sometimes look at my VC meter. I don't think I'd sell a M4-2 to get a M6 as long as you have the framelines for the lenses you use. For my use it's better to have an external meter/use sunny 16. Many people say the first three Leicas were the best (M2, M3 and M4) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted April 8, 2012 Share #4 Posted April 8, 2012 hi guys recently I found myself happy to purchase an M4-2 from my co worker in really great condition. There's no lightmeter in it as you well know so I'm using sunny/16 - a Sekonic handheld lightmeter and an iPhone app 'Lightmeter" to meter the light. Some might say that the M4-2 is no competition to the M6.. but is that really the case. I know they are half the money but some say the only real difference is the buit in lightmeter. Should I go for the M6 with built in lightmeter or should I learn to guess the light conditions or even buy a Voightlander vc meter? Maybe you can tell me what I have in my hand regarding the M4-2..? Hi Jaimie I went from an M3 to an M6TTL. As much as I love the M3's build quality and the VF I just didn't get a good enough hit rate with sunny 16. While I did progress over the time I owned the M3 I wasn't good enough. Occasionally I would use the iphone meter (I don't have another meter) but I didn't like having to rely on yet another piece of kit. So an M6TTL it was for me. Brilliant camera. The meter is great and accurate. Some lament that no camera since the M4 lives up to the build quality standards of yore but, honestly, there's not that much of a difference. I like the framelines because they allow me to use a wide range of lenses. You may have already tried an M6 but if not PM and you can have a look at mine (I see you're in Holland, too). Cheers philip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimiepeeters Posted April 8, 2012 Author Share #5 Posted April 8, 2012 Hi Philipus aren't you the kindest but I do have access to an M6. Maybe I'm just trying to convince myself that I will be able to shoot with my M4 without the need to go for the M6 (or at least not in a hurry). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbbeyFoto Posted April 8, 2012 Share #6 Posted April 8, 2012 As always the answer involves a "well it depends". It depends on the style of photography you wish to seek. A camera with no internal meter works well in two situations, (i) you have the time to study the subject matter and, in particular, calculate a good exposure with an external meter, (ii) you don't have time to use even a built in meter so you use prefocus and pre-exposure. In case (ii) some would suggest an auto-exposure camera, e.g. a M7. I have to suggest if you have to choose between a M6 and a M4-2 then I have to suggest the M6 will offer more options - you can always use pre-exposure if that is best. Here's a footnote: The M4-2 has an important position in Leica history and present. Financially the M5 contributed/coincided with a difficult financial period for the company. The M4-2 production, which came after the introduction of the M5, was almost entirely based in Canada. Relatively few M4-2 were produced. It was soon followed by the M4-P. Some say Leica Canada saved the company but there is the suggestion by some that the quality of production of the M4-2 was below the Weltzar standards. Nevertheless, it helped Leica survive a bad period. From this difficult period emerge the M6. Lessons learnt from Leica's work with Minolta on the CLE allowed Leica to introduce TTL metering in a body, the M6, very similar the classic M2/M4 design. Production of the M6, in one form or another, ran from 1984 until 2002. This bears witness to its appeal. So both cameras have a role to play in Leica history. That may or my not be relevant to you. If relevant try to keep both, if not get a M6. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted April 8, 2012 Share #7 Posted April 8, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) The VC meter is a good solution for better metering with the M4, but wouldn't a Leicameter MR4 be better? I have both, and on my M4 prefer the MR4, as it couples to the shutter speed dial, and is designed to match the view of the 90mm frame lines. The VC meter is newer technology, but an MR4 in good condition is also fine. The main problem is dirty switch contacts inside, but that is easy to fix. I also have an M6 (and M5), and do like the M6 meter readout in the finder. But the M4 (from 1968) has better mechanical "feel." The M5 is the real sleeper. Wonderful camera, just a bit different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spydrxx Posted April 9, 2012 Share #8 Posted April 9, 2012 My first Leica was an M4, bought around 1968...still have it. My next one was an M6TTL, great camera, but when it came down to deciding which child to keep, it was the M4, and I've never looked back. It just boils down to a personal choice of what you feel comfortable with, not what somebody else thinks. The guy whho talked me into the M4 in 1968, still has his M3 (and no other). OTOH I've had a ton of Leica SLRs as I kept stumbling into one great deal after another, and finally left them all for a Nikon DSLR because Leica really didn't come thru (the DMR, although good was truly a half assed effort which they never followed up on). You mustn't get anything else unless you want it and can afford it...plain and simple. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted April 9, 2012 Share #9 Posted April 9, 2012 If I were still on film I would use my M4-P and either a VC meter (I do have one) or/and a Gossen Sixtomat Digital, for incident. The problem with the Leicameters is the battery. Mercury is verboten. Alkaline replacements do not work well. Wein cells do work after a fashion. The VC works on two siler oxide cells, and I have not found the lack of coupling a great handicap. But all that is in the poast. I have chucked the habit, and use a M9. The old man from the Kodachrome Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimiepeeters Posted April 9, 2012 Author Share #10 Posted April 9, 2012 are some of you guys quite experienced in guessing the light settings? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted April 9, 2012 Share #11 Posted April 9, 2012 That comes with experience. And using non-metered cameras. I can usually guess within a stop or so what the exposure should be, which is fine for the films I use most often. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimiepeeters Posted April 9, 2012 Author Share #12 Posted April 9, 2012 That comes with experience. And using non-metered cameras. I can usually guess within a stop or so what the exposure should be, which is fine for the films I use most often. can you even do this indoors? or in a big hall with no tungsten light but only light through windows 10 meters high? I really want to get to that point (too). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted April 9, 2012 Share #13 Posted April 9, 2012 That's more difficult, obviously. Are you taking photographs of the hall, or something in the hall? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimiepeeters Posted April 9, 2012 Author Share #14 Posted April 9, 2012 That's more difficult, obviously. Are you taking photographs of the hall, or something in the hall? something in the hall, people actually... but also in the house of, let's say, my girlfriend. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted April 9, 2012 Share #15 Posted April 9, 2012 You need to make sure the exposure is correct for the subject. If you are shooting people on stage, for example, the light level is completely different from the dark hall around. You need to expose for the stage, not the hall. At home, similarly, you'd want your girlfriend to be properly exposed, not necessarily the rest of the room that she is in. This is where a meter, especially a spot and/or incident one, is very helpful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimiepeeters Posted April 9, 2012 Author Share #16 Posted April 9, 2012 are there any rule of thumb for when you don't have a meter nearby? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted April 9, 2012 Share #17 Posted April 9, 2012 The problem with the Leicameters is the battery. Mercury is verboten. Alkaline replacements do not work well. Wein cells do work after a fashion. The CRIS adapter and 386 cell work great. The adapter is the size/shape of the 625 cell and contains diode circuitry to control the voltage to 1.33V. A standard 386 (as I recall) 1.5V siver oxide cell slips in the adapter. A bit expenisve for the adapter, but that's a one-time purchase. I use these in all my old cameras that were designed for the 625, including my Leica CL, M5, and Leicaflex SL, as well as Leicameters on M3 & M4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericborgstrom Posted April 9, 2012 Share #18 Posted April 9, 2012 If you have an iPod touch or an iPhone you might try the Pocket Light Meter. Surprisingly good,and free! Pocket Light Meter för iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPod touch (fjärde generationen), iPad 2 Wi-Fi, iPad 2 Wi-Fi + 3G, iPad (3rd generation) och iPad Wi-Fi + 4G i iTunes App Store Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted April 9, 2012 Share #19 Posted April 9, 2012 Hello Jamie, Welcome to the Forum. This is a Forum on which a # of people don't use meters. Often because they understand exposure to the point where they do not need them. Many readers here have cameras w/ built in meters & do not use them for the same reason as the group above. A third group has cameras w/ meters, reflex or rangefinder, & uses them. There is another group that goes to the bother of spending the extra money, time & effort to have the equipment we are using which has been designed to optimize & fine tune photography & then guess exposure & live w/ less than optimal results. To my view this last group sometimes loses a lot of the potential of what they have in their hands for very little extra effort, clutter, bother, etc. A clip on or handheld meter can often significantly improve a finished photo & does not take more effort to carry or use than an extra lens or lens hood for that matter. Why people put exposure in a different category than focussing, having marked apertures on a lens & having marked shutter speeds is curious to me. I think it is an issue left over from the old days when for various reasons exposure meters were not commonly available & people had to depend on the latitude of film to achieve acceptable exposures. No one today would ask a manufacturer to make a camera where the shutter speeds, distances & apertures are not marked. Learning to meter is easy. Everything you need to know is available on this Forum. There are many people here who will be willing to help you. Metering: Film has only 1 speed but does have some degree of latitude usually. The actual speed is sometimes not the speed it says on the box. For the most part meters tell you how to set your camera so that what was just metered will be recorded as a standard ammount of reflectivity. There are 10 steps (stops) of doubling or halving of brightness which are perceived by most people when looking @ a scene that can be printed on most printing papers. These are sometimes referred to as the Zones O thru IX (a combination of Dutch & Roman Numerals). Each Zone # is equivalent to 1 stop of exposure. Most meters perceive what they are reading to be a Zone V whether you are photographing your aunt Matilda in the back yard in the middle of summer, the same aunt in the same backyard in a yard full of snow @ 12 noon on a sunny day in winter or the proverbial black cat in a coal bin full of coal @ nite w/ no light. Now, after all of the above, how to meter? Look @ the scene. Find something Zone V. Meter it. Set your camera & go. Or: Measure something in a scene or some other something in an equivalently lit place that is more convenient. Keep in mind which Zone it is in. Adjust this reading to account for the fact that your meter assumes you are measuring Zone V & you might be measuring something which is in a different Zone. For example: If your aunt Matilda is in your backyard on a bright snowy day in the middle of winter the backyard that was a Zone V in summer is probably a Zone VII. So you would set the camera to give 2 stops MORE exposure than the meter says. This is all easier to do than it is to read or write about. Once you learn a few simple things adding a meter to your kit will make determining exposure as easy or sometimes faster than either a built in meter or guessing. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted April 9, 2012 Share #20 Posted April 9, 2012 I didn't say that I didn't use a meter. I do most of the time. But, when using my MP or M2, I know what to set the speed and shutter to, within a stop or so, before I meter. I use the built in meter in my MP, X1 and D700 and a Leicameter on top of my M2. I use a handheld meter when using my Hasselblad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.