Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Bert Collier wrote: > > For many years now I have been using an M-2 (quickload kit) and a variety > of lenses with much satisfaction, though possibly the critics may demur > over the results asthetically. While handheld meters hanging off the neck > drive members of the (insert your preference here) sex wild; as I get older > and more sure of my self, TTL metering is becoming more and more seductive > to me. You may have noticed that M-6s are being cleared out at firesale > prices, for Leica of course; and I was wondering if any members of this > august body would know how well the M-6 will hold up compared to my M-2 > (1958, tattered but happy). Would I be better off getting a used early M-6 > ? They have been in production for fourteen years now and I think you would > know and tell, unlike Leica. Thank you in advance and my apologies if I > start a flame session. I bought a new M-6 $1700 from Adorama 5 years ago dropped it hard 3 times works perfectly has never needed any work. I've put several hundred rolls of tri x through it, carried it around. I'd love to own samples of earlier Leicas which are more solid in some ways I'm sure, but the hard core Leicafiles give the M-6 a bad rap which I know to be undeserved. The new TTL gets a scathing rap as you'd expect and which I'd expect to be undeserved although I'm not getting one as a second body because of the confusion of a shutter speed dial that turns the opposite direction as I'm used to. THis makes the m6 the best deal in photography that I can think of other than a used Rolleiflex TLR.