Best Film M

[honcho]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

But I might be wrong with "worthwhile" merit of yours.  

 

No, you're not wrong.  Neither am I!

 

:D

[01af]

Personally I'd choose an M4 without hesitation, followed by an M2. Great for old dinosaurs like me ...

Yeah ... but where does that leave my wonderful Summicron-M 28 mm Asph and Summilux-M 75 mm lenses!?

 

Having a light meter built into the camera is over-estimated. As a matter of fact, separating the act of taking a meter reading from shooting leads to an entirely different shooting experience. Earlier in this thread, I called it "liberating." And I mean it.

 

The Leica M-A is the Best Film M because (1) it is today's immediate successor to camera models that were current more than 40 years ago, (2) it has the full set of framelines for six focal lengths, and (3) it has the modern flare-free MP viewfinder.

[01af]

[...] But I might be wrong with "worthwhile" merit of yours.

Your satire detector is defective.

[earleygallery]

I have been looking to shoot more film recently and trying to decide on what Film M to use. I have a 35cron and 50lux from my digital M, just need a body to match them with. I am considering the M6, M7, or getting the Leica M-A. Any insights on these models would be helpful. Thanks.

 

There is no best. There are choices. Your choice will depend on a combination of factors such as new or used, meter or no meter, auto or manual, choice of finder/framelines, preferred finish, budget, what's readily available (if in a hurry). 

 

The only one to rule out - as you have a 35mm lens - is the M3 unless you want to use a separate finder for framing. Fill your boots as they say. 

[otto.f]

That would explain perfectly why no one in the entire history of photography was ever able to make a worthwhile image with a wide angle lens on film, then.

 

Thank you for clearing that up.

Bill Brandt?

[Graham (G4FUJ)]

I'm not sure there is a "best".

It comes down more to the kind of photography you wish to use it for, what feels best, for you. You'll only know by trying a few at your dealer.

I use an M6 because it came at the right price for condition. I'd like to try an M7, but they will probably be outside my price bracket - another lens or two have priority

 

There is a saying in the Morgan world - the right car will choose you. I think it applies to Leica M cameras, too.

[paulsydaus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

@pico:

Yes if possible I would go for a .85 also. On film I'd rather not go as wide as 28mm because grain is getting more dominance over the visibility of subject details; more so than on a 24Mp sensor. The 35mm is framed very fine in the 0.85 viewfinder and you feel more connected to your subject, that's my experience.

Wish it was an option on digital, too...

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TheBestSLIsALeicaflex]

I like variety in my camera equipment.  It's based on a theory that creative people get bored easily.  As such, I would recommend an older, non metered Leica, such as an M4 or M2, because that would give you a great juxtaposition to your digital M.  A similar but really totally different shooting experience.  The real fun, and magic, comes when you develop your own film, choosing your own concentrations, developers, ect.  Welcome to (or back) to the film world.

 

As an addendum I would add that I've owned both the M6 and M7 in the past.  I never liked the diode metering of the M6.  I view the odd number Ms as really ground breaking (M3, M5, M7).  Don't understand the M-A; if you want a retro-M, just get an M4, M2, or M3, and save lots of $$.

Edited June 9, 2017 by TheBestSLIsALeicaflex

[Ko.Fe.]

Your satire detector is defective.

 

I see!   

[otto.f]

Man With Bandage, 1968, taken by Fred Herzog was with 24 Nikkor lens. This picture has traveled the world as part of the exhibitions in known art places and it is in the books as well.

 

Bruce Gilden, Magnum, 21mm and M6.

 

Jeanloup Seiff, 21 Super Angulon.

 

Raymond Depardon, Magnum photographer as well. 21mm lens.

 

Mark Cohen used a 21mm lens.

 

Wilhelm Mikhailovsky used a Zorki and a Russar 20/f5.6.

 

All on film...

 

But I might be wrong with "worthwhile" merit of yours.

I should have added that this counts for working with TriX. Of course working with Delta100 is something else, or Ilfopan or PanX Plus Edited June 10, 2017 by otto.f

[schattenundlicht]

I don't mean to make your decision more complicated, but one thing I wish I has considered is whether the Leica has a specific finder magnification. There is .58, .72 and .85. This might not concern you if you do not wear glasses or have young eyes. If the later, than the common.72, considered universal, is good.

+1

If you mainly use 50mm lenses, this may not be a real issue.

 

For me, wearing glasses, however, my M7 with 0.58 viewfinder is the only one of my Ms where I can comfortably see the 28mm framelines. On the other hand, this very camera is a veritable pain for framing 90mm, for which a M3 may be considered ideal.

[semi-ambivalent]

Accumulated costs are never an issue in Leica Land but the addition of another camera with a lower VF magnification is much greater than having a higher magnification VF and adding an external viewfinder to use a wide-angle lens.

 

I'm happy with 0.72x but if I had it to do over again I would go with 0.85x. I've found the RF -> ext. VF workflow to be pretty fluid in practice; a small enough trick even for this old dog. I use an external VF with 28mm and 21mm but use the 90mm and 135mm enough to appreciate their being a bit bigger in the M3. As a reverse test I've used a 35mm VF on the M3 to determine if 0.85 might have made a better choice for me.

 

It's puzzling to model frame lines as Leica does:

 

"...Meanwhile, the photographer can still see what’s happening outside the viewfinder frame. A decisive advantage in stark contrast..."*

 

when at least some of the frame lines being sold in this norm (28mm @ 0.72x at least) are pushed out as far as they are, glasses or no glasses. A clash between the rangefinder's excellence with wide angles and it's historical relationship with the 50mm optic. Maybe a decision in the name of product line simplicity, but if you go wider than 28 you're still stuck with an external VF. That is until the M's VF goes full electro-virtual, into which I wouldn't buy. I now need glasses to see either the image or the controls but not yet to see both (my day is coming, this much is quite clear) so at 0.72 35mm approaches being problematic and 28mm is right out. Yet the bigger image is easier to focus. Is that the primary concern or is framing? And are users 'expected' to have two cameras in order to solve this?

 

s-a

 

*https://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/Inspiration-Sehen

Edited June 10, 2017 by semi-ambivalent

[Louisgeorge]

Personally I'd choose an M4 without hesitation, followed by an M2. Great for old dinosaurs like me who judge exposure by the available light according to its availability...using the basic sunny 16 rule (or the info which used to be packaged on the inside of film boxes), and only rarely needing a meter.

 

Me too. There is no practical difference between a good M4 from the late 1960s and today's M-A.

 

Cheers

 

Louis

[TRIago]

M6 + 50mm is a dream. I wear glasses so it is perfect, using the M3 + 50mm with glasses is such a pain, it is not even worth it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[a.noctilux]

Me too. There is no practical difference between a good M4 from the late 1960s and today's M-A.

 

Cheers

 

Louis

 

If good M4 means something like original M4, I must say that practical differences (in my own use of course) are only visible in use (not in specifications on paper or Internet).

 

As my first M Leica, M4 have high praise for me.

After using them (M4) over time with pleasure, the need to be CLA or repaired often, M4s are replaced in use by newer Ms (M5/M6/MP).

 

So M-A is newest and the best money can buy new.

The elements choosen for M-A by Leica are the best modern solutions of decades of manual/mechanic M.

 

One example...

Just the (riveted) eyelets of M4 that were not sturdy for hard use are replaced by steel eyelets hold with screws in MP and M-A.

 

More...

Also as user dedicated...

M-A have the clearest viewfinder with most easy focus (my M4 not bad but lesser ease)

Leicavit and Motor usable when needed on M-A, not on base M4.

Clean front body of M-A is friendly for right hand (where self-timer is on M4, some user may miss this item, not me).

Some users replaced the M4 wind-on lever by M3 type, M-A have that item out of box .

 

Best M do not exist, but for me M-A are very close.

[wattsy]

The elements choosen for M-A by Leica are the best modern solutions of decades of manual/mechanic M.

 

 

I'm not so sure about that. My first M-A suffered from intermittent light leaks from new and was eventually replaced. The replacement has been fine so far but another M-A I bought is now, after about 75 rolls of fault free performance, showing a very similar problem and will probably have to go back to Wetzlar.

 

These two photos are recent examples with my M-A bought November 2015 and which has been problem free for many rolls of film until now. 

 

 

 

 

 

This is an example from my first M-A bought in October 2014 and which was replaced by Leica in June 2015. There is a disturbing similarity with the problem.

 

Edited June 13, 2017 by wattsy

[a.noctilux]

Ian, sorry to hear that .

 

M-A user's are scarce, I have heard some flaws in beginning of M-A production.

Never know this flaw on MP long time production.

 

What Leica explain that light leaks.

Strange.

[wattsy]

Ian, sorry to hear that .

 

M-A user's are scarce, I have heard some flaws in beginning of M-A production.

Never know this flaw on MP long time production.

 

What Leica explain that light leaks.

Strange.

 

 

Yes, it is a bit worrying – particularly because I have had the problem with two completely different M-A bodies. I only became aware of the new problem yesterday but have informed Leica UK, who in turn are in touch with Wetzlar. I do have another M-A (fingers crossed, lightning won't strike three times  ) so won't be without a camera.

[a.noctilux]

Worrying, very worrying.

 

Is-it on every frame and at same place ?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[wattsy]

Worrying, very worrying.

 

Is-it on every frame and at same place ?

 

 

Not every frame – about 5-6 frames per roll of film. I think there are examples on around 4 rolls from my most recent batch of 7. It seems to occur in fits and starts – I can see only one affected frame in my most recent two rolls of film but there are numerous examples in the three or four rolls prior to those. When I had the problem with my first M-A, it would occur very intermittently, becoming more frequent until I took the camera in to Leica. The current camera has been absolutely fault free for 18 months – until now that is. It is always in the same place, varying a little in intensity.