Which M

[erl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You will love it!

 

Giving it back will be hard.

 

Which VF are you using?

 

My preference has always been for a 45 Deg finder. That allows near 35mm shooting technique.

[MarkP]

You will love it!

 

Giving it back will be hard.

 

Which VF are you using?

 

My preference has always been for a 45 Deg finder. That allows near 35mm shooting technique.

 

 

Hopefully I'll have it for a while.

Yes, I've fitted the PM 45.

[63strat]

I'm constantly tempted by these but my head says an M6 is probably going to be more reliable, then I think an MP would be really nice..then I think that having an M7 with aperture priority would be faster.....

 

I second-guessed myself for about a week after I ordered my MP. Thought maybe I should've gone for the M7. But in the end, I really want to make all the decisions myself, so that means aperture priority not needed.

 

Check out this thread for more thoughts on all manual shooting, read the posts by forum member leicashot:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/131207-5-days-my-m9-wow-but.html

[MarkP]

I second-guessed myself for about a week after I ordered my MP. Thought maybe I should've gone for the M7. But in the end, I really want to make all the decisions myself, so that means aperture priority not needed.

 

Check out this thread for more thoughts on all manual shooting, read the posts by forum member leicashot:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/131207-5-days-my-m9-wow-but.html

 

Thanks, I've read the thread.

 

My point is that having aperture priority auto is not to allow the camera to take control of exposure but to have the option of rapidly adjust shutter speed (and see it in the VF) and then lock it in by half depressing the shutter and then recomposing.

[hepcat]

I'm constantly tempted by these but my head says an M6 is probably going to be more reliable, then I think an MP would be really nice..then I think that having an M7 with aperture priority would be faster.....[ATTACH]372956[/ATTACH]

Needless to say I haven't bought one yet...

 

ANY film M body will make better images than not having an M body at all.

[SteveYork]

Don't forget about the framelines too. M5 and earlier, in my experience, has much more accurate framelines, especially for 50mm.

[sblitz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have wondered about the perceived greater accuracy of film M framelines, particularly the old models (I have an M4). How can one really tell given the time between taking the photo and seeing the print compared with digital where you can tell in an instant?

[63strat]

Thanks, I've read the thread.

 

My point is that having aperture priority auto is not to allow the camera to take control of exposure but to have the option of rapidly adjust shutter speed (and see it in the VF) and then lock it in by half depressing the shutter and then recomposing.

 

Yes, that might be the only thing. However, the other drawback for me with the M7 was all the LED viewfinder flashing it does if you have the "wrong" settings, i.e., settings for pushing film, and exposure compensation. At least the MP is not doing any "thinking" for me.

[gyoung]

I have wondered about the perceived greater accuracy of film M framelines, particularly the old models (I have an M4). How can one really tell given the time between taking the photo and seeing the print compared with digital where you can tell in an instant?

 

I can compare M6ttl with Summicron 35 asph, M3 with Summicron 35 with goggles, and Nikon with 35mm lens, the M6ttl shows less within the frame than the other two, and the Nikon is only an FM2 which isn't a 100% viewfinder.

 

Gerry

[sblitz]

i believe you but wonder how do you make that comparison? did you take photos with marked lines in the subject and then see home much was in or not in the frame? i don't believe anyone's memory is that good to simply look at a photo developed sometime later and say ..... oh yes this captured more of the frame than the other.

[pico]

I have wondered about the perceived greater accuracy of film M framelines, particularly the old models (I have an M4). How can one really tell given the time between taking the photo and seeing the print compared with digital where you can tell in an instant?

 

Speaking only for myself, I remember the framing, possibly because of decades of Leics M work. Digital-only shotgun shooters are unlikely to foster the same concentration.

[gyoung]

You don't need to compare the photos you take, just look through the viewfinder.

None of them is completely accurate, only live view on digital is!

I use slide film mostly, and the mounts mask a slight amount, and differ from one make to another, so absolute accuracy is neither needed nor helpful.

 

Gerry

[gberger]

Steve York had an interesting observation: Consider a Zeiss Ikon (ZI). Recently, I had to give up my M7 due to Macular Degeneration (wet) and switch to a ZI. My M7 viewfinder just wasn't good enough, even with magnification and diopter change.

 

The ZI takes all of your Leica lenses, and the viewfinder is much larger, superb, with individual 35 and 50 frame lines. The 28mm also contains lines for an 85mm (works for 90mm--no problem). That viewfinder truly is an eye-opener (pun intended) and diopter lenses are available. The external 25/38 and 21mm viewfinders are bright and excellent.

 

I'm now using my stash of Leica lenses to keep on shooting. My M7 is reserved for use on a tripod, in good light, and where I really can take my time to zone focus and compose.

 

The ZI has given me that capability to stay on.

 

I started with a IIIc in 1946, so switching to a ZI wasn't emotionally easy - - - but necessary.

[sblitz]

gerry and pico -- i am still not convinced you can take a photo today and look at a print several days later and say, oh yes, the framelines were accurate or not. i understand you can get a feel for these things, my memory isn't that good. and yes i know they aren't accurate and i don't really care -- they give enough information to make framing possible. but any sense that memory alone will tell you how accurate it was, let alone across different cameras, is an exercise in perception being reality. you are all welcome to your perception and if it helps, great, but perception still doesn't answer whether you have ever put your thoughts to a rigorous test, or if anyone has in regard to testing frameline accuracy across different Ms

[pico]

gerry and pico -- i am still not convinced you can take a photo today and look at a print several days later and say, oh yes, the framelines were accurate or not

 

After fifty years using M cameras and only three lenses, I can tell.

[Les_Sismore]

Leica MP instruction manual, page 76:

 

The size of the bright-lines corresponds to an image size of 23 x 35mm (slide format) at the shortest setting distance for each focal length. At longer distances, the camera records more of the subject than can be seen within the bright- line frames.

[gyoung]

gerry and pico -- i am still not convinced you can take a photo today and look at a print several days later and.... snip

 

I have used the M3 for 40 + years and I know that if I put an object just within the frame for 50 or 35 lenses (35 with goggles) that object will be pretty close to the edge of the frame on my Provia (before that Kodachrome) transparency. The same applies to the Nikons I have been using for 20 + years (FM2 and F90). I know from comparing the viewfinders against each other that the 35 frame on the M6ttl shows less within the frame with a 35 lens attached than the M3, so I know that whatever I put near the edge will easily be in the frame on the slide but there will be other things in the picture too which were not within the frame when I took the picture.

Its not that important, I can crop the print or mask the slide, but its annoying (slightly!) that Leica adopted that compromise to get the 28 frame in rather than do the job properly, perhaps provide a larger exit pupil so that those of us with glasses could see the more accurate 35 frame which was used on the M2.

 

Gerry

[BrianUK]

M4-P if you're sure you really don't require a film M with a meter.

 

Then there's the M2 and 3 with their differing framelines...

 

Otherwise a M6 or M6 TTL, which are, apart from a battery powering the meter, mechanical.

 

What are your lens preferences?

 

Just go with what your preference and pocket dictates... it is a nice dilemma to have

[Rick Tardiff]

M3, the viewfinder with a 50mm lens is perfect..i have a 35mm with goggles on the other one and thats not too shabby either.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pico]

M3, the viewfinder with a 50mm lens is perfect..i have a 35mm with goggles on the other one and thats not too shabby either.

 

Sure. As long as you are going to use film, then you should make it as painful and as inconvenient as possible by messing with the stupid take-up spool. Maybe Leica should bring that feature back in a new model line with the moniker "M Minus".

 

Don't forget to order the optional goat-hair shirt.

.