Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/07/20

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] M6 vs the M4, and filter factors
From: "Gary Williams" <nasmformyzombie@mindspring.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 14:52:01 -0400
References: <269620-220037020153154829@M2W094.mail2web.com> <00fb01c34edc$c81a14f0$6401a8c0@Jack>

Subject: [Leica] M6 vs the M4, and filter factors


> In my pleas to this list and my other manic searching for all info a la
> Leica M4 or M6.. (which to buy and why?), I have yet to see any mention of
> the use of filters.
> I fully understand the need-to-do
> steps to measure incident light and compensate the exposure with a
meterless
> camera.  That said... I am a bit surprised that the issue of convenience
of
> the M6, 5, 7, CL et al in this regard has not been mentioned in this
> context.

> Any thoughts?
> thannks again
> Jack McLain
> Tucson, AZ

Jack

I believe only the M6, M7 and MP will provide accurate TTL meter results
with filters in place.  But you speak of convenience, are you talking a
larger view of this?  Are you trying to make do with only one M body?  I
made the switch to Leica early this year (after 25 years with Contax), so I
know a bit about what you're going through.  So If you're interested, here's
my tale.

I wanted two bodies, one "updated" (relative term for Leica) for a main body
and one "classic" for a second body.  Trying to decide on just one or the
other while switching systems at the same time was more than I could take
on.  I wanted the AE and motor drive accessory functionality of the M7, so
the non-AE M6 held no interest for me as a main body.  This is easy!Next,
for a second body I wanted "classic" Leica, but could not spend another $2K
on a camera, so the MP was out.  Too easy!  Again, I wanted "classic" so the
M6 was out. I want to use the Dual Range 50mm lens on my classic body, so
the M5 and CL were out.  The M4 holds no interest for me, too much like the
M6 only without the meter, so it was summarily eliminated.  This is just too
easy.

So it's down to the M2 and M3.  But here the struggle began.  The M3 has
arguably the best rangefinder of ANY M body IF you can live without the 35mm
frame line (50/90/135 only).  That's a tough one, I use 35mm a lot more than
50mm (the M2 has 35/50/90 framelines).  After humming and hawing for a few
weeks and changing my mind every other day, I bought both, but planned to
sell one.  Today, about six months into my journey to the dark side, I still
have my M7 as a main body, and both an M2 and M3 (together cost me $700 less
than an MP) and will use both more extensively before selling one.  That is
if I can part with one.  So much for well intentioned planning and strategy!

Gary

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from "caliguri@rcn.com" <caliguri@rcn.com> ([Leica] "Photographic Materials and Processes" REVISED Edition!)
Message from "Jack McLain" <jmclainaz@comcast.net> ([Leica] M6 vs the M4, and filter factors)