[Leica] New Leica M variant . .some thoughts (long)

[Aubin <aubin@aa.net>]

Greetings all,

some idle moment thoughts on the topic of a new Leica M, or of some
less expensive variants that use the M mount.

I got into Leica the bass-ackwards way, having come from the other end 
if you will.  I shot with Canon A and F series cameras, moved into Rollie 
2.25, then into the world of 4x5.  I was very happy with this until I went on 
the vacation of a lifetime (in '96), and needed a small camera.

I had to get into 35mm again, against my better judgement, because
there was no way I was going to have room to bring the 4x5 while 
packing the car for a three week road trip with the better half.

I figured that if I had to settle for such a small negative, it had better
be the best such negative available, and the Leica reputation for such is
well established, and had been demonstrated to me time and again by 
other Leica users.  Its just too bad that its so damn small . . .   8^)

I bought the R4 - a pre-1.6M serial number, but covered under warranty,
along with a 28-70mm zoom.  I loved it, it was wonderful, until the 
electronics went south somewhere in Wyoming.  I returned the body after 
the trip, in exchange for a new RE, and had no qualms.

I later stumbled across a used canonette, and for $50 bought the 
toy to experiment with.  Within a week I was hooked, and wanted to go 
rangefinder instead of SLR!  It wasn't until I was moving to the UK
for a year that I mustered the cash to trade the RE plus 28-70 for 
a new chrome M6 and matching 50/f:2.

Shortly after arrival at Manchester I found a used 28mm f:2.8 and I 
was set for a while. Shortly after that I bought the new 90mm/f:2,8
and then later traded the 28 towards a new 24mm, a lens much better
suited to photographing in Europe, particularly in the close confines
of the abbeys and castles that I frequent.

My experience has been that the camera is easy to carry everywhere,
it does everything that one could need to do for this kind of work,
and the few times where I just had to have a different shot, I took out 
my 4x5 and went to work.  I wish I had another three years to finish
documenting the beauty of the UK with my 4x5, but I think that it
wouldn't be enough time even so!

I rarely found the M6 to be a lot of camera to carry, and when I did
it was because I was just out for the evening, and wanted to have a 
camera just in case.  I would have gladly carried a leica P+S or a 
contax TV-s if I had one instead.  In fact, I almost bought one
several times for when I didn't want to have to carry a camera,
but thought I should have one anyway.  

I would have carried the canonette, but have already given it to my 
youngest son, who is learning photography.  I would love to have a 
leica version of the same thing, a simple rangefinder that uses a 
good fixed lens, such as the 35mm f:2, or the 50mm f:2.  Either
would be wonderful, if they could be produced for say under
a $1000.  Better still, a simple metal rangefinder with meter that 
had the M mount.  What I'd really like is the CL or CLE reintroduced, 
but lacking that I'd take a simple fixed lens body that has basic
metering capability. 

I wouldn't object to a Aperture priority version of the M6, I have
desired such conveniences often when shooting.  Its not a make it
or break it issue, as I own no such thing now, nor have I really used
it much in 20 years, but still . . . . .

To me the convenience of having a camera that really fits in the pocket,
or is small enough and light enough to be carried when you wouldn't
carry any excess is very desirable.  One fixed length, such as 35mm 
is perfect, since I am just trying to have a record of the event, or perhaps 
capture that one special moment, but it has to be clear and sharp.
It also has to handle low light levels, since for me the times when this is
likely are out at dinner, or an evening on the town, or while visiting friends
at their house for the evening.  These are not supposed to be photographic
moments, in that I should really be paying attention to the people I'm
with, and not making them into photographic subjects.  

Part of me still sees the picture, and wants to capture it, so having a 
stealthy simple camera that gets the shot is valuable, but I don't want
to be LUG'ing around too much volume or poundage.  This would be 
a wonderful compromise.

For now, I carry the M6, but I do lust after the TV-s, and unless Leica
does something soon to satisfy that lust, I'll just have to turn my 
attentions that way, for those times when the M6 and lens is a bit
much to carry.

The point though for me is that the Canonette got me into rangefinder
cameras, and made it a no-brainer to move into the M6 as soon
a I could afford it.  A canonette like camera that accepted M mount
lenses, or even already had one on it would have guaranteed it,
but then, I already knew Leica, so it wasn't much risk in my case.  

I do think that some others might get into rangefinder work if they 
could use one affordably, and into Leica once they discover that it
is not limited, and in fact sets the benchmark for other cameras.

I think that those who need automation would also go that way
if they felt that Leica covered some of what they needed, but I 
well understand the issue of limited resources that the company
struggles with.

Okay . . .a long post just to say that I'd like a cheaper body, 
and wouldn't object to AE priority, but what the hell, its %100
recycled electrons.  

take care -

Norm