Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/14

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] ....M vs R's...
From: "Mark E Davison" <Mark_E_Davison@email.msn.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 13:28:12 -0700

TMLee writes:

"Can someone summarise what's teh basic diff between M photography vs SLR
photography... Just read that someone said it takes some time getting used
to M -use......"

I use an OM4Ti SLR and an M6. Here's what I find are the significant
differences:

The M6 has a very bright rangefinder. It is much easier to focus wide angle
lenses precisely  in dim light with the M6 than with an SLR.

The M6 is quiet. You can photograph musicians and they won't notice at all.

The current M6 lenses (I have 24/2.8 ASPH, 35/2.0 ASPH, 50/2.0 and 90/2.8)
are optimized for low light, relative to the corresponding OM lenses. The
Leica lenses appear to have less flare, and better contrast when shot wide
open. Many on this list will claim that they always have a magical edge over
the Olympus lenses, in every situation, but I have not been able to see
that.

I can shoot hand-held shots with the M6 at slower shutter speeds than with
the OM4Ti. There is no mirror slap with the M6 (since there is no mirror).

The M6 is a relatively stable technology, seems to have very high build
quality, and it may become a family heirloom. (I also have an M3 from the
60's which operates perfectly and can still be repaired.) Photojournalists,
who are very hard on equipment as a group, all seem to praise the M6 for its
ruggedness. The point is that you can expect the useful economic life of the
M6 to be very long. This makes the high purchase price easier to swallow.


On the other hand:

The M6 can only focus down to .7 meters with short lenses.

The built-in metering with the M6 is, roughly speaking, a very wide spot.
This metering system is primitive compared to the OM4Ti.

It takes a while to get used to loading film from the bottom.

There is no depth-of-field preview since you don't look through the lens.
You'll actually have to use the depth-of-field scales engraved on the
lenses.

The M6 and lenses are such mechanical joys to operate, that you may become
caught up in a very expensive case of Leica lust. A single 50/1.0 lens for
the M6 (the famous Noctilux) costs more than a fairly complete OM4Ti kit.


What is confusing about all this, is that either an M6 or an SLR can be used
for a great deal of general purpose photography. The M6 is the best for
available light photography, especially for photographing people
unobtrusively in dark places. SLRs are the way to go for closeups, telephoto
work (anything longer than 135mm), and use of fancy color filters.  For
anything else, you could use either type of camera with good success.
However, the M6 is small, and the black lenses (made of aluminum) are
particularly compact and light compared to any other camera (including the
OM4Ti!), so I conclude that for general purpose travel photography, where
size, weight and reliability are important, the M6 is the best camera
available, bar none. Especially true if you want to photograph in museums
without flash.

Hope this helps.

Mark Davison