Choosing new film M

[Big John]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 1/11/2024 at 11:21 AM, Jewl said:

For me the MP is the best choice if looking for a new film M. Started with the M6 which had technical issues (went to Wetzlar 2 times) and exchanged it then by the MP (via the service incident). Should have taken the MP from the beginning as I feel it is better from a value perspective. You barely find an old/used MP for a reasonable price. An M6 in comparison you can find for 2-3k. I'd pick a used one if I really wanted the M6! But as warranty etc. was important to me, I picked a new one. And of course, the built in light meter is very important for me. That's why used Ms without a meter or an M-A are not an option (that might also help to make a decision).

What do you mean about value perspective pls? Referring to resale value? Thanks. 

[Advertisement]

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

[TheBestSLIsALeicaflex]

2 hours ago, hansvons said:

I read this frequently. It sounds like light meters are for beginners and Leica got it wrong when implementing a light meter at some point. You only have to learn how to evaluate the amount of light with your eyes, which will benefit your photography on many levels, and all will be good. 

I was never able to do that. Perhaps it’s me, perhaps it's the logarithmic function of the human vision. Probably both.

I now have an M4P, which is basically an M6 without the meter, shot hundreds of photos with it, and still can’t do it, relying on my phone for metering. 
I also own an M6 and prefer it over the M4P because of the meter. 

I can see that all of that is a matter of perspective, of what you find acceptable and what is not. I’m picky with exposure and critical focus, others are more forgiving with themselves, guess the exposure and do zone-focusing 
 

Depends on the film and lighting conditions, but the latitude, especially for B&W film, can be pretty wide.  You can be off two stops and still get useable negs.  I routinely overexpose just for increased shadow detail.  Outside in sunlight, it's easy; just open it up a stop for clouds, two for shadows, ect.  Even interiors shots, being off a stop or so adds to mood.  I think sometimes people think there is one best answers for exposures, but really there's multiple answers depending on what you're trying to emphasize.  And now with available post processing via computer the latitude is even larger.  

Meter once, and only meter again if the light changes.  I just run into a lot of the same lighting conditions, and there muscle memory takes over.  

[Big John]

2 hours ago, cj3209 said:

Film is great because it is very forgiving; its not easy to overexpose so even if you 'guess poorly' on the exposure, chances are, you'll still get a decently exposed shot.

With digital, I'm always trying to underexpose so my highlights don't get creamed.  It's a bit annoying.

I do admit its liberating shooting with my M-A but for critical shots, I use a meter.

 

Can you help me out with a bit more about the forgiveness of film pls?  I shot film for 20 years and did some of my own developing. Do you mean that in dev/printing, you can adjust for less than perfect exposure? Thanks. 

[Big John]

Update. In local Leica dealer yesterday

Learned/was told:

MP: the BP is not for me, it was a finger print magnet. So MO chrome is in the decision for me. 
 

M6: was told that it has the insides of an M-A. And that it wouldn’t be produced forever.  Film scratching not an issue any more. Availability now ok. Nice black finish, like the M11, so M6 in the running. 

MA: (was chrome), spent some time looking thru a VF with no exposure info in it!! Not completely sure how I feel about that so still in the running.

After all my reading and your v helpful comments above, it still seems to just come down to aesthetics.

Oh, other comment is that earlier I also went to a specialist Nikon dealer and spent some time with an F3 HP.  The M viewfinders seemed so incredibly bright by comparison to an SLR.

Meanwhile my Nikon F5 sits next to me!

 

Edited January 17, 2024 by Big John

[VanDooglz]

The differences between them are mostly cosmetics or ergonomics, both are subjective factors. Your best bet is to play with them in a Leica store if you have access to one.

Someone else suggested looking at used cameras, and I would argue that the best Leica ever made was the M7. It offered quite tangible advantages over the current line, namely the AE mode and the improved shutter speed dial. Both of these make for a much faster camera which, arguably, is what an M was supposed to be: shoot-on-your-feet kind of a machine. The regressions re-introduced by Leica into the M-A, MP and the new M6 for nostalgia reasons make all of them slower. Additionally, the M7 offers more accurate shutter speeds and more of them, and it can be found with different viewfinder magnifications in case you're not the 0.72x type.

 

Edited January 17, 2024 by VanDooglz

[cj3209]

13 minutes ago, VanDooglz said:

The differences between them are mostly cosmetics or ergonomics, both are subjective factors. Your best bet is to play with them in a Leica store if you have access to one.

Someone else suggested looking at used cameras, and I would argue that the best Leica ever made was the M7. It offered quite tangible advantages over the current line, namely the AE mode and the improved shutter speed dial. Both of these make for a much faster camera which, arguably, is what an M was supposed to be: shoot-on-your-feet kind of a machine. The regressions re-introduced by Leica into the M-A, MP and the new M6 for nostalgia reasons make all of them slower. Additionally, the M7 offers more accurate shutter speeds and more of them, and it can be found with different viewfinder magnifications in case you're not the 0.72x type.

 

I really like the M7 but the last batch was like in 2018 or so.  If the meter dies, there is no guarantee it can be fixed due to parts availability.  Also, when the meter dies, you only have 1/60  and 1/125 shutter speeds.  That limits the longevity, IMHO.  MP and M6 are better because all shutter speeds work even if the meter dies.

[Anbaric]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, Big John said:

Can you help me out with a bit more about the forgiveness of film pls?  I shot film for 20 years and did some of my own developing. Do you mean that in dev/printing, you can adjust for less than perfect exposure? Thanks. 

With colour negative film (or Ilford XP2, which is C41 B&W) you have a lot of exposure latitude without adjusting the development. Scanning adjustments can deal with several stops of overexposure and a stop or so of underexposure. Some people choose to set their meters a bit lower than the box speed of the film to that the baseline exposure is a modest overexposure. See for example:

https://petapixel.com/2018/02/05/test-reveals-exposure-limits-kodak-portra-400-film/

E6 colour slide film is less forgiving, especially to overexposure, which can much more easily blow the highlights and give you thin slides. Here it's better to err on the side of underexposure, but not by too much.

With conventional B&W film, you can adjust development to compensate for a whole roll that has been shot at the 'wrong' speed.

[VanDooglz]

1 hour ago, cj3209 said:

I really like the M7 but the last batch was like in 2018 or so.  If the meter dies, there is no guarantee it can be fixed due to parts availability.  Also, when the meter dies, you only have 1/60  and 1/125 shutter speeds.  That limits the longevity, IMHO.  MP and M6 are better because all shutter speeds work even if the meter dies.

I never understood this argument. For some reason it's only popular in the film photography community. Everything can die. Your car, the house plumbing, the $4K Macboko Pro, everything you use is on the can-die list. Demanding your camera to be immortal at the expense of being less useful is just... weird.

[Anbaric]

10 minutes ago, VanDooglz said:

I never understood this argument. For some reason it's only popular in the film photography community. Everything can die. Your car, the house plumbing, the $4K Macboko Pro, everything you use is on the can-die list. Demanding your camera to be immortal at the expense of being less useful is just... weird.

In this case, I think it's because Leicas are expensive cameras, and we are used to the mechanical models having very long service lives. The first Leicas are now nearly a century old, and can still be fixed. But the main circuit board of the M6-TTL became unavailable only 15 years after the end of production. You can at least use that camera unmetered for everything except flash, and the mechanics can still be serviced. But an M7 is almost completely dependent on its unique electronics, which are already 6 years out of production. Will it still be possible to get an M7 repaired 10 or even 5 years from now? If this were a £100 Nikon FE, I don't suppose most people would be that concerned. But with the M7, you could end up with a £3000 brick. If I already had an M7, I would just shoot it and not worry about it, just as I don't worry about the meter on my M6 Classic failing (as with the TTL, there are no main circuit boards for these at the moment). Hopefully a typical M7 will remain fully operational for many years to come. But if I were making a purchasing decision, I would weigh the advantage of having aperture priority exposure against what might be a much shorter service life than any other M. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

[williamj]

11 hours ago, Big John said:

Oh, other comment is that earlier I also went to a specialist Nikon dealer and spent some time with an F3 HP.  The M viewfinders seemed so incredibly bright by comparison to an SLR.

Meanwhile my Nikon F5 sits next to me!

 

I agree the M viewfinders are bright but you can get brighter viewfinders on SLRs than a F3. Nikon viewfinders after the F3, such as in the FM2 and similar models have screens with special structures that harvest more light.

The other factor is the maximum aperture of the lens, and most SLRs now are fitted with a F/2.8 maximum aperture lens. For example, the viewfinder on my 29 yr old FM2 fitted with a 50 mm F/1.8 lens is brighter than my good condition M3. I would expect a new M to have a brighter viewfinder than a 67 yr old M3, of course, but I could fit a F/1.2 lens if I wanted it brighter :). Cheers.

[Jewl]

vor 13 Stunden schrieb Big John:

What do you mean about value perspective pls? Referring to resale value? Thanks. 

On the one hand, yes and on the other hand also the perceived (personal) value. I had the perception that an MP (even though the reissue of the M6 costs almost the same) was always seen as THE analog M (probably why it is called mechanical perfection 😉 and of course among those connoisseurs) and at the moment every self-taught instagram photographer wants an M6 to be cool and a huge amount of them probably don't really recognize any other M (my former M6 had way more reactions in the public by strangers than my MP) . That's also one reason, probably not the biggest, why I went with the MP over the M6 eventually! I little bit of "understatement" if you can call it that way when talking about an MP 😄

And probably I cannot see any further "this is my M6", "Does an M6 still make sense in 202x?", "M6 long-term review" influencer videos on youtube...

Edited January 18, 2024 by Jewl

[Anbaric]

2 hours ago, Jewl said:

On the one hand, yes and on the other hand also the perceived (personal) value. I had the perception that an MP (even though the reissue of the M6 costs almost the same) was always seen as THE analog M (probably why it is called mechanical perfection 😉 and of course among those connoisseurs) and at the moment every self-taught instagram photographer wants an M6 to be cool and a huge amount of them probably don't really recognize any other M (my former M6 had way more reactions in the public by strangers than my MP) . That's also one reason, probably not the biggest, why I went with the MP over the M6 eventually! I little bit of "understatement" if you can call it that way when talking about an MP 😄

And probably I cannot see any further "this is my M6", "Does an M6 still make sense in 202x?", "M6 long-term review" influencer videos on youtube...

There were some genuine improvements in the MP (flare-resistant viewfinder, brass top plate, new meter) but of course the new M6 has these too, so I'd expect both cameras to retain a similar proportion of their value at resale in the long run, though the new M6 may be more in demand at the moment. The rest I think is mostly marketing. Leica were targeting the 'heritage' market with the MP, so they went for the M3/M2 style wind/rewind and emphasised 'mechanical perfection'. That made a lot of sense in a world that was rapidly going digital. With the new M6 they want to capture a wider market, including younger photographers like those hipsters who latched on to the original M6 during the film revival, so they made it cosmetically almost identical to the old model. What's been lost is the accessibility of the original M6 before the influencers took an interest, something of a bargain until the price about tripled when it became the cool camera to have. And of course the new version sells for MP prices. For practical purposes you can't go wrong with either model - it really comes down to how you prefer to wind and rewind your film, and the style you prefer.

[lmans]

On 1/10/2024 at 12:48 PM, IkarusJohn said:

I went the M-A route for three reasons:

• no electronics to go wrong (my confidence in Leica’s electronics has been sorely dented)
• uncluttered viewfinder
• simplicity - no battery, and just composition, focus, aperture and shutter to think about

As for metering, this is obviously the determining factor.  When I learned photography, we had to assess the prevailing light conditions; then with built in meters, I had to learn what the camera was metering and adjust.  With an EVF, I preferred to assess exposure using exposure simulation through the viewfinder.  The M-A has taken me back to incident readings using a handheld meter, which appeals more.

The fact that the M-A is an MP body with the battery hole filled in doesn’t bother me - the black ostrich print leather covers it well; and I quite like the pop-up rewind knob on the M-A.

For some reason, I’ve never really warmed to the look of the M6 - it’s just pastiche as it seems to be the same camera as the MP, just with a retro body.  I don’t see the point, but then I wasn’t an M6 owner and I’d never really noticed them when they were current.

Good luck!  I’ve been using my M-A over the summer, and it really is liberating (except I now have a stack of films to develop).

Excellent choice and really, the same reasons why I went with the MA. Sure...sure...sure... You can always not use the built in light meter but really, the temptation to use is too great. People say they won't use the light meter but they do. The MA forces you, to focus on just what you said....composition, focus, aperture and shutter. 

Glad to see you selected the MA...a beautiful camera. 

[lmans]

On 1/17/2024 at 8:09 AM, cj3209 said:

 

I do admit its liberating shooting with my M-A but for critical shots, I use a meter.

 

🙂 far out!

[Sailronin]

On 1/10/2024 at 1:31 PM, Big John said:

Thanks everyone - really good food for thought.  A couple of comments back in response to some of the points made:

- 35mm is my favourite FL.

- I was leaning towards a smaller, lighter SLR (I only have my F5 and while it is a great camera, it is big and heavy).

- still not clear whether the new M6 has scratching issues?

If you are looking for a smaller/lighter SLR, try an Olympus OM1.  They're "cheap as chips", very light weight yet quite robust.  I have one for inclement weather or sketchy areas where I don't want to carry my MP.

[stefanusj]

On 1/10/2024 at 6:22 PM, Big John said:

Shot film in the 80s and 90s (Olympus and Nikon) then digital only for past 20 years (including SL 601 since it came out)  Loaded my Nikon F5 last year and loved shooting film again.  Now considering an M.

Have read and watched all I can, so understand the differences between the 3 currently available film M cameras but still undecided. Don’t mind black or chrome (and not chasing a BP finish).  Have always had a light meter in my camera (apart from shooting my Dad’s old Ilford as a kid) but am attracted to the simplicity of the M-A. Areas I could use advice on include the following please:

- quality control issues, not sure if M6 scratching film issue has gone away.

- viewfinder, which is best?  (My eyesight is ok but am in mid 50s). 

- reliability over the long term.

Anyone else been in my situation?  How did you choose?

Thanks for your help everyone. 

Black Paint MP

[ianman]

On 1/18/2024 at 3:29 AM, Anbaric said:

If I already had an M7, I would just shoot it

Now that’s just cruel!

[lmans]

On 1/22/2024 at 4:58 PM, Sailronin said:

If you are looking for a smaller/lighter SLR, try an Olympus OM1.  They're "cheap as chips", very light weight yet quite robust.  I have one for inclement weather or sketchy areas where I don't want to carry my MP.

I have an OM1 and OM2SP with an array of Zuiko Lens....  yes, very in-expensive. The thing about the MA is that one can buy one new or fairly new ....while the OM's are getting long in the tooth, although, still usable and small, light etc.... .... just find a good one. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[John Robinson]

My experience with M film cameras is with the M2 and M3.  I had an M6 TTL 0.85 which I sadly sold when I did not use it for five years because I had an M8 then M9 (I kept the M2).  When I went back to film and found an M3 in excellent condition I discovered that the 0.92 viewfinder is even brighter and quicker to focus than the 0.85 M6 (that also had the problem of flare in the rangefinder patch).  If you use 35mm or wider lenses, I would say look for an M2 in good condition; if you mainly use 50mm or longer then the M3 is a gem.  Using a purely-mechanical camera without a built-in light meter can be challenging but learning to use a hand-held light meter when necessary is a really good way to train your eye to judge lighting conditions. 

The other good thing about the M2 and M3 (probably M4 but I have not used one) is that there are plenty of camera technicians who can provide a CLA.  I sent my M2 to Leica for an overhaul and new shutter curtains in 2004 but I am not sure, having heard about their new pricing schedules, I would do it again.

The issues with later models of the M are well-documented and seem to add up to possible issues with TTL light meters and battery-dependency in the M7.  If money is no object then of course the brand-new MA is tempting but--even with the cost of CLA--an M2 or M3 is an excellent choice.

[algrove]

On 1/10/2024 at 6:22 AM, Big John said:

Shot film in the 80s and 90s (Olympus and Nikon) then digital only for past 20 years (including SL 601 since it came out)  Loaded my Nikon F5 last year and loved shooting film again.  Now considering an M.

Have read and watched all I can, so understand the differences between the 3 currently available film M cameras but still undecided. Don’t mind black or chrome (and not chasing a BP finish).  Have always had a light meter in my camera (apart from shooting my Dad’s old Ilford as a kid) but am attracted to the simplicity of the M-A. Areas I could use advice on include the following please:

- quality control issues, not sure if M6 scratching film issue has gone away.

- viewfinder, which is best?  (My eyesight is ok but am in mid 50s). 

- reliability over the long term.

Anyone else been in my situation?  How did you choose?

Thanks for your help everyone. 

Once I decided to get a Leica M film camera (after the M6 reissue came out) I decided to get an older M6 TTL. Good light meter. I also acquired a 0.85 RF for my needs and the liked that so much I acquired a 0.58 same model. So I keep a 50mm (Summicron f2 from 1956) on one and a 35 Steel Rim on the other.