Leica M5 or M6 ?

[Nikos]

I found myself with 3 M-mount lenses (for my NEX).
For the first time since 1998, I feel I would like to develop a few rolls of film again.

I thought of getting a Leica M5 or M6, if I find one for up to $1000 (more or less).
What is the main differences between M5 and M6?

Any advice?
Never used a rangefinder before. What should I be careful about?

[berraneck]

I would choose M6 as it´s smaller

check this great guide:

http://www.cameraquest.com/mguide.htm

[Nikos]

[rbelyell]

i know leica has allure, but if you never used RF before, i might suggest getting a good, but much less expensive cam, like a bessa R3 or a rollei 35rf. both have meters, unlike the leicas you mentioned, which makes life a lot easier when youre using an ailen piece of equipment, and they can be had for $400 or less.

what m lenses do you have?

[Sevo]

The M5 was a (by all means failed, it killed Leica's rangefinder production for some years) attempt to depart from the M-series body shape - a oversized, some say ugly, M mount camera with a internal meter. It has its lovers, but very few service people still handle it.

The real choice if you want a affordable M Leica for use and don't stumble into a bargain or want to worry about the maintenance of an antique would be between M4-2/M4-P (the simplified M4 versions revived after the M5) and M6 (essentially a M4-P with meter). All of them are still reasonably new, compared to pre mid seventies collectables and you won't be surcharged on any collectors value.

http://www.cameraquest.com/mguide.htm

[Nikos]

[rbelyell]

oh, nice stuff. for two of them you'll need an external vf anyway, why not consider a bessa t. i have one and love it and i got it for like $250 gorgeous, like new. it has a 1.5x Rf so focusing is easy, though you would only need it for the 35mm as other two mostly shot at infinity or hyperfocally...

honestly, and of course this is only my opinion, for these lenses, because focusing is not an issue, a leica is kind of a waste of money, overkill for what you need. except for the 35, you will not ever use the VF/RF as you will need an external vf for framing as i dont believe any leica has frame lines for 15 or 21mm. because of huge DOF you won't be using RF either on these two lenses. so why shell out $1000 for a cam whose main features you will not use so much? save a lot of cash, see if you like shooting with this type of cam, and if you do spend your saved money on a nice m mount portrait lens!

[Nikos]

[rbelyell]

exactly, thats my point, you will not be using camera vf or rf for either the 15 or 21. thats why a leica cam is, again imo, overkill for your lenses. the bessa t has no frame lines because it is intended for use with external vf for framing because it's RF is magnified 1.5x for ease of focusing fast lenses, like your 35mm. it is the most accurately focusing RF cam for this reason. it is also one of the least expensive but has very good build quality. i love mine.

[scsambrook]

I like Leica, own two of them, and cheerfully admit to partiality and even prejudice in ther favour.

If you want a rangefinder and are willing to invest up to $1,000, forget about any of the Bessa models. I have a Bessa R, it's a nice camera, but it's nowhere near as "nice" as a Leica. The R3 and R4 do feel better in the hand, but seem to be more expensive now, nudging up towards some Leica models.

If you need a built in meter, the M6 should be fine and within budget. If you don't need a built in meter, then get an M2 and save a lot of money. Or an M4 and save not quite so much money. Seems the M4 gets a better press than the M4-2. The M6 is a bit prone to flare-out of the rangefinder spot which doesn't happen to anything like the same extent in the M2 and M4. It's a fact of life with the M6 and someone I know sold his and went back to the M4. But he was a bit of a photo-hypochondriac.

A few words of really serious warning though. The M Leica is a terribly seductive creature, I know of no other camera which feels so good to handle. It may become addictive Before you know it, you might be selling your car to fund an M9P - !!!

[Nikos]

[rbelyell]

stefan, why would you recommend a leica when he will not be using the vf/rf for two of his three lenses? what is the value in it? why are you so dismissive of bessa's in this particular situation? the issue is not whats best for us, but what might be best for him given the lenses he has. remember, he said he has never used a rf before, so he's not even sure he will enjoy shooting that way. and will not be using all its features given his lens setup. why is it better to spend three times as much for the red badge? perhaps there is a concrete reason i do not understand...

[F16SUNSHINE]

I'm one of the oddball M5 Users. I have a pair of them and both have film loaded and unloaded continuously.
After trying all the other M Models I simply like the M5 best. Is it an anomaly maybe. Here is what i Like.

The Meter.
The Meter is a match needle arrangement that makes it very easy to see where you "place" exposure. I don't care much for LEDs in RF cameras.
In Slr's they are fine but with an RF the LED can sort of blind a scene in low light.
It is a "Spot" Meter and works very nicely as such.

The shutter dial and button.
The shutter dial is larger than the other M's. Leica located it Coaxially with the shutter button making changes very simply and keeping your finger near the shutter button at all times.
As well the shutter dial overhangs the front lip of the camera making it very simple to operate. Combined with the shutter speeds displayed in the VF, you never need to look away from the VF.

VF
The viewfinder is clean and uncluttered. The 50mm lines sit solo with a small circular area indicating the metering "spot".
The 35 lines are clear with only corners marked inside for 135 Which act as the metering area for the 35mm FL. 90 get's it's own frame as well.
This is a detractor for some who shoot 28mm. One of my bodies has the M6 frameline set installed adding 28 and 75mm framelines.
As i shoot primarily 50mm and 35mm I actually prefer the original lines.
The Shutter speeds as mentioned are displayed in the VF. Unique to the M5.

Small things also.
The VF does not have the flare issue of the M4/M6 although to be honest I never had any trouble with that when using those models.
The Film rewind is geared which is quite nice.
The Camera is very discreet. No Red dot to tape over. If one likes to tape their cameras the M5 might disappoint

Look for one with SN starting with 135xxx or later. The earlier ones had an issue with the film sprocket that could crack.
Most have been repaired but, you never know...
It is the last Wetzlar built M through out and in my opinion the best built of the bunch.
Yes it's a bit bigger but not much. Like really not much.

OK, there you have my opinion of the M5

[scsambrook]

[rbelyell]

thats an interesting take. i wouldve thought both the 15 and 21 were mostly shot hyperfocally, like how i shoot my 24's. also, fyi, i have a leica and a bessa t, and i use them for different circumstances, but if i had to keep one, it'd be the bessa. maybe the decision isnt always 'leica-matic'

[Nesster]

Strangely, I find this ad compelling... makes me want one. At what point was this method of loading abandoned, or was it?


while others fumble. Leica M4 1969 by Nesster, on Flickr

[scsambrook]

I think the system was carried right through to the M7 and MP. You could get a conversion kit for the M2 amd M3 at one time.