Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/11/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In my opinion, the M5 with a Noctilux, 90f2 or 135f2.8 with finder is just the right balance. I prefer the needle metering, as it lets me know how far off I am. I really don't like LED's shining at me. And I like seeing the shutter speed in the finder. And on the 1,300,xxx, the malfunction was with an internal shaft that was too weak. In discussion with DAG, all the ones that were prone to break have broken. If you are buying one to use, and it works, it won't have the problem. regards, Vick -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+vick.ko=sympatico.ca@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+vick.ko=sympatico.ca@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Leirex Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 10:20 AM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] 2nd M-body recommendation I also have wanted to know why some people were always complaining about the size of the M5. I know it is a tad bit bigger and heavier than the what is called normal sized M. The difference has never bothered me at all. The size difference must have been inevitable to implement THE BEST Leica meter built in, in my book. Actually, I enjoy its bigger and heavier size. I always feel the M5 might be the smoothest M in the Leica line for some reason. All I might be concerned about is the fact that the M5 with serial number less than 1.3 mil is more prone to go bad, which I forgot what function it was. Best Regards, David ----- Original Message ----- From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 7:05 AM Subject: RE: [Leica] 2nd M-body recommendation > LOL!! Measure and weigh that "much too bulky and unwieldy" camera some > day, Seth - We're talking silly little millimeters - Fits my hands > perfectly, better than any other M - And not only are there no > limitations on the meter, to me it's the best metering mechanism on > any M. Granted, at this point in time it might be foolish to make the > investment as the meter arms are probably all due to fall apart, but > that's another question. > > But I'm not surprised that a LHSA maven would react that way to the > vaguely innovative M Leica ever produced. ;-) > > -----Original Message----- > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf > Of Seth Rosner > Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 7:29 AM > To: Leica Users Group > Subject: Re: [Leica] 2nd M-body recommendation > > > IMHO, much too bulky and unwieldy, Vick, compared with any other M. > And to me, the meter mechanism has serious functional limitations. > > Much as I love the M3, M2 and M4, I agree with those who plump for the > M6. I would try for the original "classic" M6, aus Wetzlar gekommen, > even if you > then send it to Leica for a routine CLA. I did just that and got back an > M6 > that truly rivalled for smoothness of film advance/shutter cock, my old > M4 > and any M3 I have used. Sherry Krauter told me that for some reason, the > > factory shipped M6's slightly "dryer" than earlier M's and that they > get > > much better after a CLA, "particularly one of hers!" ;-) > > Seth LaK 9 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Vick Ko" <vick.ko@sympatico.ca> > To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 9:44 PM > Subject: RE: [Leica] 2nd M-body recommendation > > > > If you want an internal meter, and don't like the M6 style of meter, > > let me suggest the M5. > > > > regards > > Vick > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: lug-bounces+vick.ko=sympatico.ca@leica-users.org > > [mailto:lug-bounces+vick.ko=sympatico.ca@leica-users.org] On Behalf > > Of > > > Alex Fan > > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 9:04 PM > > To: lug@leica-users.org > > Subject: [Leica] 2nd M-body recommendation > > > > > > Hi, I am new to LUG and M. I have started to use M camera for > > about 6 months. I started with a user M2, a 50mm cron lens and a > > handheld meter. It has been wonderful experiences of using this > > camera to take photos and now 90% of my photos are taken by this > > camera, my SLR, DSLR > > > and digital camera are seating quietly inside dry boxes. In the > > past couple of months, I have also bought a 35 cron and 28 Elmarit, > > the 35'con is now my favorite lens. I like to use wide lens rather > > than tele lens. > > > > I am now considering to buy a 2nd body. However, I am in a dilemma > > of > > > which M body to buy. Shall it be body with meter (M6 / M6 TTL) or > > another purely mechanical one (M2 / M3 or M4). MP and M7 is out of > > my > > > range. Logically speaking a M6 or M6 ttl seems to be a good > > complement > > > of a M2 and the VF of M6 seems to be brighter than M2. However the > > quality of build of M2 seems better than M6. I gradually get used > > to the way of using camera with no internal meter but it is no harm > > to have additional convenience of a build-in meter. > > > > Any suggestions to me. > > > > Thx > > Alex Fan > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information