New MP/voigtlander or pre owned M6/Elmarit

[ElSid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As the title says... Ready to invest in an M series and can either fund an MP brand new but then only afford the voigtlander. Or would it be a better option to get the used M6 and quality glass.

My instinct would be MP/voigtlander, and obviously this is extremely subjective, but I wonder what the hive mind thinks before I pull the trigger.

[ktmrider2]

I have never really been able to tell the difference between Leica glass and Zeiss or Voightlander lenses by looking at the photograph.  There are so many things which influence the result-tripod or no tripod, film type (100 ISO vs 3200 ISO), developing technique or scanning.  I have been using Leica film cameras since 1974 and have bought and sold a lot of camera bodies and lenses.  I have lenses from Leica, Zeiss and Voightlander as there are standout and unique lenses from each manufacturer like the 35f1.2 from Voightlander which is still the fastest 35mm made or my favorite lens that lives on my M4, the compact 35f2.8 from Zeiss which may be the sharpest 35 made.

Are you aware of the film scratching issue with new or recently made M cameras as reported here?  I think either route you decide will be fine but I would leave behind the idea that only Leica makes "quality glass".  A new black paint MP would be my choice as I love the finish but honestly I would find a mint M2 or M4 and probably put a lens from Zeiss on the front and use the extra money for film or to travel.  If you have never used an M2 you owe yourself, especially with the 35 focal length.  Oh, and get a good quality incident light meter.

[intangiblethings]

I’d go for a used MP with a Leica-comparable Voigtlander (likely released in the last few years as those are the most competitive lenses) in your preferred photo length.

 

[TomB_tx]

I'd flip a coin - either choice is fine. The M6 I've had since 1985 is my most used camera, and I actually prefer the features to the new MP. Yes the top plate on my M6 is made of zinc, but it still looks new and functions identically to the brass covers of my M2,3,&4. So I consider the body choice equal.

I  used only Leica lenses on my M cameras until 2009, but now have both Zeiss and Voigtlander, and have even tried some new makes from China. I wouldn't spend the extra money for Leica lenses anymore. However, evey Leica owner should have a 50 or 35 Summicron - it just feels right!

[Fotoklaus]

Voigtlander is Quality Glass but has not the Leica brand on it.

Hard to choose between your options.

[madNbad]

I have owned lenses from Leica, Zeiss and Voigtlander and each has their own qualities in rendering as well as handling. The latest releases from Voigtlander are really good and well made. Save some money, buy a Voigtlander and spend more on film!

[logan2z]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Although I prefer the haptics of Leica lenses, I'd probably opt for a BP MP or a black chrome M-A (if you can live with an external meter) and Voigtlander or Zeiss lenses.  You can always add some Leica glass in the future, but new M-As and MPs can be hard to get, and if you have access to one now I'd take advantage of it.

[spydrxx]

Tough choice which only you can answer. I had an M4 for 35 years before I got an M6, and found I hated it by way of comparison - too cluttered viewfinder, preferred incident metering to the in-camera M6 metering. Sold it and eventually sold my M4 as my eyesight was going bad. With eye surgery I decided to come back to rangefinders and found the M2 satisfied my needs and cost less than an M4 or M6. I also expanded the lenses I had been using, as I found some of the Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses much better bargains than their Leica equivalents. Don't get me wrong, Leica makes excellent lenses, but other manufacturers have periodically come up with lenses which match or beat their Leica equivalents at a fraction of the cost. While I thought this was something new, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that in the 1950-60s some of Canon's rangefinder lenses (usable on Leica bodies) were actually better performers than their Leica equivalents.

[Huss]

I have both the new Voigtlander 28 f2 v2, and the Leica 28 Summicron Asph v2.  I also had the 28 Elmarit Asph V1.

All three lenses are fantastic, and in a blind taste test no-one would be able to tell the difference on an actual photograph.

Where I prefer the Leicas is the design and handling/usage is much more pleasing.  That is it.  FYI in the USA the going rate for a second hand Voigtlander is $600-$650, which is how I bought mine and it is indistinguishable from new.

I’d get a used MP (better light meter,  flare free RF patch) and the CV lens.  On fredmiranda there is an MP for $3400.

[Ouroboros]

I would also go with an MP & Voigtländer, but that is obviously influenced by the fact I have an MP and have no desire for an M6, used or new.

I think the gap between Leica and Voigtländer is closing in both optical performance and quality of materials and manufacture to the extent that several Voigtländer lenses seem to be a match for Leica equivalents, except on cost.

Put aside endless lens tests and and spurious YouTube ‘reviews’ and compare prints side by side, then ask yourself whether any visual differences, including pride of ownership, are really worth the cost differential.

Last week, I was chatting to a trekker in a tea house in Nepal who was carrying an M262 with Voigtländer 28mm f2 Ultron and 35mm f1.4 Nokton ii lenses.  I have my M10-R with Leica 28mm summicron f2 asph and 50mm summicron f2 with me and we did a lens swap out of curiosity.  
 

From what I can see in the images on the rear screen of my M10-R, the 35mm Nokton f1.4 ii is an absolute steal. 

 

[Jewl]

I can only echo the above. Have a 35mm lux FLE which I meanwhile mainly use on my M11 whereas the Voigtlander Nokton 35mm 1.4 resides on my MP. I do think it makes sense if you really shoot wide open very often, then the Leica lens is way better and sharper! But as I have to stop down during the day anyway (dont want to use ND filters), it does not make that much difference at f5.6 and above…

and, the Elmarit is not a fast lens anyway. I do think at the fastest aperture, comparable 3rd party glasses already produce great results. 

You will not stick to the lens you initially buy anyway over the years as one always tries to convince oneself that new glass makes everything better. And once in a lifetime Leica glass is needed 😄 and then you realize you are still the same photographer as before…

long story short, I would go for the MP. 

[davidmknoble]

@ElSid, your initial question was also about an MP v and M6.  Just know that unless you have a special edition M6, the M6 is not a brass top and some have been known to have paint issues depending on where and how used.  The MP is a full brass body (as are most of the M4’s, and all the M3’s and M3’s).  

The gear system inside the MP is also considered longer lasting, but clearly there are many M6’s still in heavy use.

I prefer the MP’s over the M6’s (although the new M6 is tempting).

You can upgrade and change lenses at any time, but the camera will remain.  In terms of the film scratching, I have had film scratch over time in every camera I have ever used (including freshly CLA’s Nikon F2’s).  While it can be the film plate, in many situations it is the film canister or the methods used to load bulk film, load the exposed film on reels, etc.  There are so many points in time that film goes through handling, it is very tough to say the camera is the only point responsible.  Worse, if the scratches are not in exactly the same places, the back plate is not the cause.  I say this after developing many hundreds of rolls of film, mostly bulk loaded myself.

Enjoy whatever you pick and have fun shooting!

[Steve Ricoh]

5 hours ago, Jewl said:

I can only echo the above. Have a 35mm lux FLE which I meanwhile mainly use on my M11 whereas the Voigtlander Nokton 35mm 1.4 resides on my MP. I do think it makes sense if you really shoot wide open very often, then the Leica lens is way better and sharper! But as I have to stop down during the day anyway (dont want to use ND filters), it does not make that much difference at f5.6 and above…

and, the Elmarit is not a fast lens anyway. I do think at the fastest aperture, comparable 3rd party glasses already produce great results. 

You will not stick to the lens you initially buy anyway over the years as one always tries to convince oneself that new glass makes everything better. And once in a lifetime Leica glass is needed 😄 and then you realize you are still the same photographer as before…

long story short, I would go for the MP. 

So very true! Many of us fall for advertising / influencers claiming a different camera or lens will make a better photographer. Ultimately our vision system is far too ingrained by a life time of seeing and interpreting that new equipment can’t possibly change. We’re still the same old photographer behind the lens and that’s the constant that makes or breaks image making.

Camera-wise I’d pick a second hand MP over an M6. Basically I don’t like zinc unless I’m looking for a galvanised piece of metal, such as gate latch.

Lens-wise, I would choose a lens with character over sharpness. There’s a thread on ‘characterful’ lenses somewhere in the lens sub-forum. Maybe have a look there. 

[Anbaric]

23 hours ago, ElSid said:

As the title says... Ready to invest in an M series and can either fund an MP brand new but then only afford the voigtlander. Or would it be a better option to get the used M6 and quality glass.

My instinct would be MP/voigtlander, and obviously this is extremely subjective, but I wonder what the hive mind thinks before I pull the trigger.

Personally I would (and do) get everything secondhand, bodies and lenses. Both the M6 and the MP are excellent cameras, so it's really a matter of preference. Voigtländer make some great lenses, several of them competitive with their Leica equivalents at much more sensible prices. Even so, it may be a mistake to buy either a lens or a body purely because it's cheaper if you really want something else, as eventually you may end up buying twice.

Most of the internal differences between the MP and the old M6 Classic have no practical significance, but there are a few things to consider when making your choice. The MP has upgraded rangefinder optics that make the patch less likely to flare out in certain lighting conditions. It also has a light meter with an extra centre LED that can still be fully serviced (this isn't currently true for the M6 Classic, for which a major component is no longer available, though that may change soon according to some reports). Much is written about zinc vs brass, but I wouldn't worry if you find a clean M6 (as most of them are) without 'bubbling' - if it was from a batch afflicted by this problem it will have had >20 years to show up at this point. The M6 has the M4-style rewind crank that is faster to operate than the MP's retro knob, as well as an articulated film advance lever. Some people prefer one setup, some the other.

Are you choosing the Elmarit because you shoot mainly at 28mm, or just because it's currently the cheapest starter lens? If you're not wedded to this focal length you might want to look at some of the alternatives, especially secondhand. A 35mm works very well with an M6 or MP 0.72 viewfinder (the 28mm framelines are quite close to the edge of the viewfinder, so it can be tricky to see the full frame at once, especially if you wear glasses), and is a good general purpose lens (the focal length I would choose if I could only have one lens on either of these cameras). But of course YMMV.

[Huss]

As others have mentioned, the Nokton 35 1.4 II is superb.  I also use the Leica 35 FLE and Distagon 35 1.4 as reference.

The speed/size/optical characteristic combination is wonderful, and makes it so enjoyable to use.

I would get the MP vs the old M6 just because of the better flare free vf.  But aside from that, like w any M, they are all great and whatever you pick you will not be disappointed.  All that matters is if the camera functions correctly.

[dpitt]

To me this choice is a no-brainer. With film camera's the main influence on the end result is the film and the lens. As long as your camera works as it is supposed to, you can not see the differences between a shot taken with the M2 or a shot taken with the MP.

Take the best lens and the cheapest M you like. I leave it up to you to decide what is the best lens for you, and what you value in any M model. I personally like the M2 for its simple handling and clean frame lines.

[Mikep996]

I feel somewhat different than many views expressed here.  The lens is far more important than the camera. I have never regretted selling my M2, M6TTL, and M7.  I HAVE regretted selling Leica M lenses because I ended up buying them again...years later for more money! 🙄   

 

[williamj]

On 3/26/2023 at 1:16 AM, ElSid said:

 

My instinct would be MP/voigtlander, and obviously this is extremely subjective, but I wonder what the hive mind thinks before I pull the trigger.

I agree, get the new MP because you can’t improve on it, leaving only lenses that you have to improve over time, because you know that’s what’s going to happen.

 

By improve I mean if you got a second hand MP you could improve that with a new one, and a second hand M6 can be improved with a new M6. If you go second hand M6 and second hand Leica lens that’s two things to improve. 

[grahamc]

I have 2 variations of the M6 (one of which as the anti-flare viewfinder kit installed) and an MP.  I find the rangefinder patch in the MP viewfinder to be marginally (but noticeably) more contrasty than both the M6's .  

Which means I'm more confident using it. 

They are all great but this really tips the balance to MP for me. I love it 

 

 

Edited March 27, 2023 by grahamc

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[newtoleica]

Lenses make a big difference to the image, film cameras only to the haptics/pleasure of using (unless it’s either not working or has major usability issues that prevent you being ready to take the shot when needed). 
Get the lenses that have the signature that you want to have in your images, and then the most reliable body you can afford once that’s done. The lens bit is tough though, as your particular use might not play to an expensive lens’ strengths… how often do you shoot wide open? Does corner resolution or vignetting matter? How important is control of speherical aberration (do you shoot star fields?) what I personally like (a blend of modern and classic Leica ‘look’ with some character but controlled, a bit of 3D cinematic style and the haptics of Leica lenses) isn’t what you will value most.