First off I am new to the site and it is truly fantastic! I am new to the Leica world as well as I recently aquired a M5. I don't see hardly anything about it even mentioned. Is this like the step child of the Leica world??????? It really puzzles me as to why there is nary a mention about this camera and what I think is a really fine piece of photographic equipment. I almost feel a new sense of freedom with it as I shoot mainly 8x10 and wanted something smaller for loose street photography. Just a questioning kind of thought. Thank you all again for the wealth of information on this site!

Michael Pry

-- Michael Pry (vila@techheadnet.com), August 23, 2001

Answers

You are not caught in some strange conjunction of the universes. There is indeed a M5. Go here for an "all M5 all the time" piece:

http://www.cameraquest.com/m5.htm

And for an overview which includes the M5:

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

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), August 23, 2001.

Michael:

You do indeed have the bastard child of the Leica line. I have the 339th one ever produced. I love it except for the crease I put in the bottom once knocking it off a shelf in my safe (ouch). No one talks about them much as there were never that many produced. However, the Leica CL is in some ways similar (and very dissimilar at the same time) and there were 60,000 (plus another 20,000 Minolta CLs) produced and you hardly hear a peep about them either. The M5s are great machines. I find the extra size is nice when shooting a Noct (the lens, not the sausage) and other big lenses. The meter is more sensitive than the M6's but the needle system is hard to see in low light (where you need that sensitivity). Every now and then you'll run across one that someone had M6 frames put into. I would love one but I always seem to have just bought a lens when one turns up.

-- mark (mramra@qwest.net), August 23, 2001.

Just try typing "leica m5" into the little box at the top of the screen called "address"

-- sanford lee (sanford@usa.com), August 23, 2001.

The M5 was Leica's answer in 1970-1 to the demand for a TTL meter, and another example of Leica engineering a superb product without heed to the market and it nearly got them bankrupt. The main complaint about the M5 was that it was bigger and heavier than many SLRs of the day (not Leicaflexes, though). The M5 was discontinued and the M4, which had been discontinued, was eventually revived around 1974 and was welcomed by buyers--despite still having no built- in meter--and led to the M4-2 and M4-P and finally, *ten years later* the M6 debuted with a TTL meter in the M4 chassis. Mechanically the M5 is very reliable and has several advanced features: a metering pattern more akin to a spotmeter than the M6's, shutter dial easily turned with one finger, shutter speeds visible in the viewfinder, metering area (with 50mm lens) outlined in the finder. The bottom- mounted rewind crank is a little quirky, and it lacks a 1-sec speed on the shutter dial although I seem to recall that "B" and the selftimer can be used to get 1 sec somehow. Early M5's had rectangular strap fittings at one end (so it hung vertically)to which a 3rd lug was later added for a choice of carrying orientations. Certain lenses (collapsibles--if collapsed, and early 21 and 28mm's) can not be used on the M5 or damage will occur to the meter cell mechanism, which is on an arm that drops into a well in the base when the shutter is pressed. Cocking the shutter raises the meter cell into position in front of the shutter and turns on the meter. The meter unfortunately will then not turn off until the camera is fired, though with a lenscap in place the current draw (on the discontinued PX625 Mercury battery--recalibration or adaptors are available)is not great. Judging by current prices on the used market, the M5 is more popular by far today than when it was new.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), August 23, 2001.

In the late 60's or early 70's I was on assignment to Pan Am, testing a new computer we had installed on a 707. I heard two pilots talking: "Flown the 747 yet?"

"yep. just checked out in it yesterday."

"Whaadya think? Any good?"

"Yup. It's a Boeing."

The highest compliment that can be paid to an aircraft.

The following year I picked up an M5 in a New York camera store, and handled it for a few minutes. My companion asked, "Whaddya think?"

I replied, "It's a Leica."

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), August 23, 2001.

"Every now and then you'll run across one that someone had M6 frames put into. I would love one but I always seem to have just bought a lens when one turns up. "

Marc,

It is inexpensive to fit a six frame mask set to your camera. It has been a long time since I made similar enquires to Leica but I think around $100US comes to mind.

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), August 24, 2001.

The M5 is very collectable now, and I think it is a lovely camera. The cameraquest article stresses its good points. Why it all failed is quite a mystery to many observers, but perhaps the "meter on the stick" approach seems unsophisticated to many Leica users, there was and still is a feeling that the Leica is a barebones camera and the M5 seemed to have too many comforts, was too large, and did not allow some lenses to be used on it. The Leica M crowd are difficult to please. I dislike the 2 lug one (my CL hangs vertically too and I hate this aspect of the camera) so the 3 lug one from my perspective is the nicer variant. But as others say the M5 and CL might just not have existed in Leicadom for the amount of talk that they attract - rather weird.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), August 24, 2001.

I just purchased a pile of Leica brochures off ebay and one of them was for the M5. One interesting point of the M5 i found was its rangefinder baselength of 68.5mm. I often read on here about the M3 being superior in this respect to the M6, with the M3 having 62.1mm. That makes the M5 even better! Its larger size obviuosly has an advantage here. I often read complains about certain lenses like the 50mm f1 and 90f2 and 75 f1.4 being too large and difficult to focus on M6's etc wide open, well with the larger size and rangefinder base of the M5 it surely must be a winner with these lenses?! People claim this camera was a failure because it didnt sell in vast numbers but it sold in much greater numbers to the Nikon SP which is considered the best and most famous of the Nikon rangefinders, I think the purists need to look a bit closer at the M5 and judge again.

-- Joel Matherson (joel_2000@hotmail.com), August 24, 2001.

I bet the M6 with 50mm is heavier than many amateur SLRs of today! All Leicas are heavy (or dense is a better word). The exception being the R6.2 which is unexpectedly light. The M6 is not a lightweight. If the M5 is heavier it is only because it is a bit bigger. The Leica CL and Minolta CLEs are very light in comparison.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), August 24, 2001.

I agree with Robin - the M5's bulkiness largely is due to its size not its weight. But after I use my M5 for an extended period of time, I feel so comfort with camera's size and weight. It certainly has better balance with Noctilux and Summilux 75 than other classic M bodies.

-- Cing-Dao Kan (cdkan@yahoo.com), August 24, 2001.

All M cameras with rangefinders have a physical base length of 68.5 mm. The M3 camera has a magnification of 0.91 which results in an effective baselength of 62.3 mm. The M5, like the M2, M4, M6 and variations, has a magnification of 0.72 which results in an effective baselength of 49.3 mm.

The M5 was not a success for several reasons. First the SLR was perceived to be way to go for the buying public, both professional and amateur. Sales of Leica rangefinder cameras were hitting all time lows (about 10,000 a year for the M5 and have pretty much stayed there as well).

Second, was the introduction of the CL. This camera was made by Minolta for Leica and I think Minolta was one who benefitted the most. Leica was hoping for an introductory model which would then lead to people moving up to their flagship M5. Well the 65,000 CLs sold during its short three year run and took sales away from the M5 rather than what Leica had hoped for.

The final nail in the M5's coffin was the SL2, Leica lost money on every one sold! So here we have Leica's flagship cameras selling in low unprofitable numbers, and, the camera they are selling buckets of, making money for Minolta! So the SL2 was cancelled, the R3 was developed and the complete M line was dropped (and then saved by Leica Canada but that is another story).

Cheers

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), August 25, 2001.

Yes, the M5 and the SL2 are in many ways the apotheosis of the old-fashioned Leica - beautiful, somewhat complicated mechanical cameras, beautifully made and finished. Reminds me of the Zeiss/Ikon Contarex in some ways, but Leica at least got much of it right and hence were able to extricate themselves from the crisis by the skin of their teeth.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), August 27, 2001.