Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/05/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: MR4 question
From: "Steve LeHuray" <>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 09:56:56 -0500

> I have one on my M4 and another one on my M2. These are both superior 
> and inferior to the M6 meter. On the plus side, the MR or MR4 always
> covers the same angle, regardless of lens in use.  This area is about
> the same as covered with a 90mm lens and so can be selected with the
> preview lever. The MR and MR4 can also be used without bring the
> camera to the eye, which can be an advantage in some situations.
> On the minus side, the MR and MR4 have two operating ranges which
> must be manually selected. They are also less sensitive than the
> meter in the M6. They also use mercury batteries, which can be hard
> to find. The M6 meter can be used at eye level, which can be an
> advantage at times.
> IMHO, metering should not be the most important criteria to use when
> selecting an M body.
> Ken Wilcox


Good MR/MR4 information. I am always puzzeled by people prefer these meters
over a simple to use hand meter.


> At 8:38 AM -0400 5/13/02, wrote:
>>Can anyone give me their impressions with regard to using an MR4 meter on,
>>say, an M4-P?  Is it a good way to go, does it give accurate readings?
>>Thanks for the input,
>>George S.
>>To unsubscribe, see

- --
To unsubscribe, see

Replies: Reply from Ken Wilcox <> ([Leica] Re: Re: MR4 question)