Re: [Leica] M2 vs M4 vs M6 - Newbie Q

["Bill" <ohlen@lightspeed.net>]

Jeff:

This has to be the most comprehensive, well thought-out analysis and summary
of the functional differences between the M2-M3-M4-M6 cameras that I have ever
seen.  I disagree that the M6 rangefinder flare in anyway mirrors the flare in
the lenses, but there appear to be work-arounds to that problem.

I might add that the "slow rewind" system on the M2 and M3 is not really that
much slower.  The take-up systems on the M2 and M3 seem to be much easier to
use if one desires a purposeful double exposure (the tension seems to be less
and the film seems to stay in the same place better).  Also, the M2s and M3s
can load as fast as the rapid load models, particularly if you have extra
take-up spools.

Great analysis.

- -----Original Message-----
From: 4Season <4Season@boulder.net>
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 9:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] M2 vs M4 vs M6 - Newbie Q


>Skip,
>
>The M6 meter is nothing fancy, but it's definitely very handy, and I feel
>that it makes the M6 overall, the nicest to use.
>
>Seeing two framelines in the 0.72X finder simultaneously does not bother me,
>and in fact, I think the 35mm framelines in the M6 finder are positioned
>exactly right, and the 50 is good too. I wish they had corners rather than
>sides though. The 90mm lines are thin and the corner gaps are especially
>big, but it's useable. It seems to me that the M6 rangefinder patch and
>framelines do wash out more readily in harsh lighting, but for the most
>part, photos taken under these conditions are already flaring pretty badly.
>I usually wear glasses and think it's hard to see the entire 28mm frame at
>once, but it's better than no frame at all. I plan to skip it and go for a
>15mm lens, which needs a separate finder no matter which M it's used with
>(15, 35, 50, 90--and 2x tele extender??)
>
>The M6 lens release button has a finger guard and a flat top, so accidental
>lens releasing is very unlikely. Considering that the lenses twist off in
>just 1/8th turn, this is no small matter! On my M4, I must've accidently
>grabbed it's (unprotected) release button as I removed the camera from the
>bag, because not long afterwards, I heard my new 50 mm smack the pavement
>with a dull "thud". If I still owned the M4, I'd have an M3-type finger
>guard added and probably have the lensmount spring and lens release spring
>replaced, as both were a good deal weaker than those in my newish M6, which
>hasn't dropped a lens yet!
>
>Leica was trying to eliminate some lathe and milling operations when they
>redesigned the rewind knob on the M6, and the little plastic spinner has a
>too-small gripping area. The M4's metal piece was much larger and easier to
>grasp. the M6 piece is adequate, but if you can find a NOS chrome M4 part,
>send me a private email :-) A minor annoyance, given that they clearly know
>how to do better.
>
>The M4, M4-2, M4-P and M6 can be rapidly fired with ease, and you do not
>need to remove all finger pressure from the shutter release as you wind the
>camera. With the M3 (and presumably, the M2) you do, and it's real annoying.
>If I owned one of these older M cameras, I'd certainly look into getting it
>modified.
>
>The M6 eyepiece is rubberized and does not mar acrylic eyeglasses and
>sunglasses.  I guess when the M3 was designed, eyeglasses were made of
>harder stuff, because an aluminum eyepiece is not too kind on today's
>stuff.. It should be possible to retrofit the newer part onto older cameras.
>
>Finally, the vulcanite leatherette covering of the M4 and earlier bodies has
>it's devotees, but to me, it smells faintly like a car tire, it can leave
>black marks when something wipes against it, and at this late date, tends to
>be brittle and crack off, sometimes in largish chips. Will today's stick-on
>coverings do as well 40 years from now? Who can say, but for the here and
>now, I'll go with the modern stuff. Yes, the older gear can be very
>appealing in it's own right, but I've confined my opinions to operational
>differences.
>
>Jeff