Jump to content

Leica M-E vs Nikon F6


threewood

Recommended Posts

There are plenty of threads in the forum regarding the Df - search should help you find a few.

 

But in short, the Df is a nice camera if you want to use your existing collection of (old) Nikon lenses. Go to a decent camera store and try each camera out. See which one works best for you. However if you haven't shot with a rangefinder before remember it is a completely different experience to using an SLR. Some prefer it, others don't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good advice above. As an old film shooter from the '60s, the M9 was the only digital that let me shoot exactly like I did with my film Leicas and old lenses. The Df is the first SLR that attempts to offer that in an SLR. I'm still tempted by the Sony A7 as a way to similarly use my various SLR lenses (Leicaflex, Nikon, Canon, Pentax, etc.). If I had more Nikon lenses I'd try the Df.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I looked at the Nikon dF and decided not to go with it. I have a lot of old Nikon glass, but the fact is the new lenses are often better. I have two D800's and I was prepared to sell one for the dF but after trying out in the store, I decided that there wasn't enough difference in size to cause me to shift over to it. I own an M9 and many leica lenses. I purchased a Fuji X pro1 when my Leica was in for an overhaul and cleaning. I am shooting primarily with the Fuji these days. I have the M adapter and the Nikon adapter so I can use that body with either lens family. I don't use the Nikon's as much as I used to, but the d800e is an outstanding camera when shooting landscapes and it has very good low light capability. The same can be said for the Fuji. The M9 just is not in the league of either of these two when it comes to low light. As far as the user interface on the digital cameras goes, I think they all suck to some extent. The jpeg processing in the Fuji is the best of the bunch, but I still always shoot jPeg + raw. If I were in your shoes, I would buy a used leica m9 or m8 with the appropriate lens before jumping into an M-E. Renting might also make sense. The Leica glass is the investment. Once you get into the Leica system, you are into some very large dollars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

which one do you think is better?

There is a vast and quite fundamental difference between shooting rangefinder and SLR. The idea of 'better' is far too simplistic and a direct comparison just not possible. If you want to compare resulting 'image quality' then try searching the web - which will yield as many opinions as results. In all honesty its a pretty pointless question without a great many caveats being added.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good advice above. As an old film shooter from the '60s, the M9 was the only digital that let me shoot exactly like I did with my film Leicas and old lenses. The Df is the first SLR that attempts to offer that in an SLR. I'm still tempted by the Sony A7 as a way to similarly use my various SLR lenses (Leicaflex, Nikon, Canon, Pentax, etc.). If I had more Nikon lenses I'd try the Df.

 

While I like the size and configuration of the df, at the same price the d800 is a much better all around camera. This is why df's are readily available.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Oh, and being the user of two M9's, a Monochrome, and a current D600 (and many generations of Nikons from FM forward alas never F6) I would say the ME/M9 is better. Much much better. For me. Provided you have the skills with rangefinders and you aren't hanging out the door of a helicopter or mashed up against a stage with sweating fans, need to get really close, etc etc. But the M9 takes the most beautiful pictures right out of camera. Kinda like slide film.

 

Provided you can afford some lenses that is. Much easier to do with Nikons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of my long ago beloved Nikkormat - which I traded in for a Leica IIIf - and never looked back.

 

It was the lenses then and now even more so.

 

Love my M9 & M-E - should do me for as long as they can be repaired - if necessary. Not a single problem yet.

 

To me, perfection.

 

(For video, 5DM3 or RX-100)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
In common with all new Nikons skin tones are not good from the D800. I have basically given up on mine and daren't really use it when people/face pictures are involved. Yes I know about in camera fine tuning white balance and hue's etc, but after lots of work the pictures still just don't look right. Nikon D3 D3S and especially the gorgeous files from the D3X blow the socks of all the latest generation Nikons for colour and the look of the picture output.

 

Interior pictures lit by brolly flash on the D800 are in my opinion poor and don't compare at all well to what I was previously used to from pro spec Nikons.

 

Being a big Nikon user this is not what I want to report but these are my findings with the D4 IMHO looking especially not very good either.

 

Leica M9 files (can't speak for the M240 but what I have seen and downloaded leave me very disappointed) are always IMO very good and far superior to anything produced by the D800. The D800 is of course though, a far more versatile camera than any Leica M could ever be so maybe if this my be the way to go if this is important to the OP.

 

Never used a Nikon F6 but after years of use of all pro spec film Nikons from the original F to the F5 I would say that the F5 was probably the best film 35mm SLR ever made - a truly superb camera.

 

I currently use both D3x and D800e Nikons and occasionally D700.

 

I process Nikon raw in Capture NX2 with picture mode 'neutral' for portraits or people shots and am happy with the results of both. Nikons 'standard' picture mode is to saturated and contrasty for people (IMHO). I have not found LR / ACR profiles for Nikon to be as correct (to my eyes) as Capture NX2 which is why I put up with the work flow.

 

My last film Nikon was (and is) an F100 which I could use forever if I still used film. Ditto my Leica M6. I of course still have 2 nikon F's and a Leica M2.

 

Regards ... H

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can answer your own question if you read through the posts on the M9.

 

I own a M9, D800 and Df. I've always been a big Leica and Nikon Fan and have used them professionally for nearly fifty years. The m9 makes lovely images when it's not in the shop. Having purchased it new and had it for just over a year it has been back to Leica three times and is currently at Leica NJ.

 

My D800 has to go back to NPS within a year for a lose PC connector and the Df is perfect as of this date.

 

The D800 is amazing in image quality. They're close to my Hasselblad digital images, very close. The camera is flawless in operation and even high ISO files are low noise and it's sharp. The Df makes beautiful files, allows easy use of G, aI/s MF and non AI lenses. It's great to have options. High ISO noise is the least I've ever seen and color is very nice. There are just too many positive points to go into regarding the Nikons.

 

The secret to great color including skin tones is profiling your camera. I do it with every digital camera I own and have owned for several years. It makes all the difference in the world. One thing about photography and especially color is there are no shortcuts to quality images.

 

Just on the basis of reliability I would not buy another Leica digital. My M9 needed a new mother board and sensor straight out of the box, trip one of three.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...