Leica M-A, M6, MP image differences

[Arrow]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 minutes ago, 250swb said:

Paying tax is otherwise known as 'contributing to society', where would the world be if I didn't like a drink, or two?

Cheers! 🎖️

[bilbrown]

Short answer, no. It’s the film and optics. Nothing else for image quality... but

 

long answer, yes. Because unless you have a perfectly clean, aligned and lubricated (CLA) older (or newer) body you will get a variation from shootin in either how it captures the image or how YOU respond to using it.

 

for instance, my M2 i bought in Prague from a dealer when i had forgotten a film camera. I have noticed a significant difference in the shots between that M2 and my M7. Granted I was using sunny 16 when I shoot the M2 and I found I over exposed or under exposed more often, with the M7 I am typically using the light meter and it rarely happens. I thought that was just it and it was just me. But then this year I picked up an MA. I use the same sunny 16 rules with the MA as I did the M2 and I get completely different results, could be I am shooting in more familiar lighting conditions or maybe not. So this to me means that there is a difference in the way that I shot the M2 in comparison to the way that I shoot a newer body that I have owned only myself. I have been the only owner of my M7 and my MA, and I don’t know how many ownersBefore held my M2. Another thing that makes  me think the M2 may be “off” is my wife borrowed it with the Voightlander meter and got a completely blank roll.

I also own a M4-2 and M1. In both cases I have shot similar scenes and I prefer the M4-2 to the M1 ( essentially a uncoupled rangefinder M2). Now, in this case it could come down to a few seemingly cosmetic choices that actually impact the way I shoot. The M4-2 is lighter and has a different shutter arm, more like the M4, That impacts the way that I pull back the shutter and fire it a subject. The M1, like the M2, is a more solid classical body and so therefore I shoot it a little bit more thoughtful and think of it as a precision instrument which it is, but that’s not the way I shoot — I shoot very quickly and just want to get the photo. Reason I picked up the M1 in the first place was the fact that I wouldn’t even be commissioned to look through the viewfinder and focus, all zone focusing — which I thought was going to help me ignore the camera and focus on the image.

so now, I finally settled upon a bit of a mishmash of technique using two bodies. I am using the M7 that I have only owned, and the MA that I also have been the sole owner of. In both of these cases, I know the quirks of the camera. The MA is likely the smoothest LEICA I have ever used in a film camera. It’s quiet, technically perfect, has all of the frame lines that I would need as it has added the 28 and 75 frame lines from previous additions while maintaining the feel of the older M2 camera. The M7, which has been my main M for work related stuff, has the fluid shutter arm of the M4 While also having a Very accurate meter when the batteries are installed and work (not some thing that always occurs, another story). I have conceded to the fact that my MA will be the camera that I likely die with and the M7 is some thing that I love but will likely have to pass on or get fixed or do various things to keep in my arsenal. I can use the same lenses on both, and my digital bodies which I tend to turn around not as fast as some but still have no problem selling eventually. Right now I have the M10R And the M8 as my only digital bodies. I’ve had the M9M, M240, M246 and original M10. It may be interesting to note here that my only chrome am bodies have been M1, M2, M7 and original M10 — all others are black paint or my preferred matte black chrome. Why? Because I feel like the black matte bodies get less attention then the chrome variations and that also impacts the way that I shoot. This was even proven to me when I was shooting with both my MA and M7 and someone looked to the M7 and said enthusiastically that it was the best camera and asked if it was a Leica... while I was holding my MA which they completely ignored.

 

Edited December 6, 2020 by bilbrown
Spelling

[Advertisement]

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

[Michael Geschlecht]

On 5/20/2020 at 6:14 AM, Vitaliy.V said:

Thanks to your replies

yes, that’s logical. I'm used to all digital cameras being different. Now I need to decide which one to take, I am inclined to M-A with an external light meter

Hello Vitally,

Welcome to the Forum.

Because you are coming to film photography after using digital cameras your question is very reasonable.

Sometimes people forget that when a person is buying a digital camera they are buying the equivalent of buying a film camera, all the film they need & processing of the equivalent of film.

Altho there may also be other processing added later after the image is out of the camera.

Different digital camera models can sometimes produce different qualities in images when the same lens is used on different cameras. 

With film cameras the image capture sensor system & the in camera adjustments to the captured image is all within the film.

So, if the lens is the same lens moved camera to camera.

And the shutter acts equally in different camera bodies.

The images produced will be the same. Because the image capture system is within the roll of film.

I hope that this will be helpful.

Best Regards,

Michael

Edited December 7, 2020 by Michael Geschlecht

[robert_parker]

On 5/20/2020 at 11:37 AM, Vitaliy.V said:

Yes, i read and watch many reviews and wanted to make sure there’s no difference in the image.

 I probably watched thousands of photos and like 3 lenses, 50 APO, 28 summilux and 50 noctilux 0.95. I like night time photos and think to buy 50 apo and 28 summilux or one 50 noctilux.

This not for professional use, just for life

Lovely choice of lenses - the one thing I would say is that the Noctilux 0.95 is quite a big heavy lens, although its image quality is outstanding, especially in low light - perhaps the 50APO and 28 Summilux might give more of the 'Leica feel' and be a more versatile combination to begin with.  The other possibility might be a the classic set up of a 50 Summilux and 28 Summicron, both of which would welcome you to the Leica world really well (don't worry - the Noctilux, 28 Summilux and 35 Summilux FLE will follow quickly enough once you are hooked.... 😈📸😁👍).

Edited December 7, 2020 by robert_parker

[bilbrown]

55 minutes ago, robert_parker said:

Lovely choice of lenses - the one thing I would say is that the Noctilux 0.95 is quite a big heavy lens, although its image quality is outstanding, especially in low light - perhaps the 50APO and 28 Summilux might give more of the 'Leica feel' and be a more versatile combination to begin with.  The other possibility might be a the classic set up of a 50 Summilux and 28 Summicron, both of which would welcome you to the Leica world really well (don't worry - the Noctilux, 28 Summilux and 35 Summilux FLE will follow quickly enough once you are hooked.... 😈📸😁👍).

I have the Summilix 50 and Summicron Apo 50, as well as t/he Summaron 28 and Summicrom 28, is the Summilux 28 really that good?