Well I usually stay away from blanket equipment questions. But I felt like thinking about new toys tonight. Here's the deal. I got back into the manual RF world (for a third time) with a Leica CL. And I've been really happy with it. But my CL really needs to go somewhere and have it's meter fixed (along with a general CLA). Since I don't see the point of having a half assed job done, I am planning to send it to S. Krauter in NJ. Since it sounds like she's one of the best at that sort of thing. The bad news is that it could be up to 2 months before I see the CL again. So I was thinking of getting a 2nd body to use while the CL was gone. For a little background, professionally, I am an "extreme" sports shooter and use mostly digital SLR's these days. I use my RF gear for traveling and more documentary style work.

Here's what I see my options being:

M2: I know where there is (was) a user M2 for around $650 (maybe less since it's been there for a bit). No meter in the M2, but hey, my CL doesn't have a meter at the moment either. I like having a 35 frame for when I finally find another pre-asph 35/1.4 to replace the one I stupidly sold after my first trip into Leicaland.

M6: I have had an M6 twice now. And they were not ever as nice to use as the CL is. But there's a really nice "classic" black body for $1200 at my local pro shop. It's probably a little more than I want to spend though. Then again, it would be nice to have a M6 body in case the rumor about a "M" digital back ever comes true.

Bessa T: An interesting idea. I could just use it with a 50/25 combo while the CL was gone. So I'd only have to buy one viewfinder (or I could just find a russian turret finder). At $450 for the body and winder from Hong Kong via ebay, that's a pretty good deal. Plus, you've got to love the swing back loading. I haven't really used one much though, just played around in the store, it might be a little slow for my taste with the 50.

That's about it. Though I didn't feel like making this post longer than it needs to be, I do have various reasons why I'm not really thinking about the M3/4/5, CL, CLE, Bessa R/L, or Hexar. I suppose I could just use my QL-17 while the CL is gone. I'll just have to start thinking about everything in the weird blueish cast that it's finder gives. Or I could just put the money into fixing up an old IIIf that I have on long term loan from a family friend (about $400 for what it needs).

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), September 03, 2001

Answers

Oops, it's more like $525 for the Bessa T and winder. That's what I get for not noticing the "reserve price not yet met".

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), September 03, 2001.

Send it FedEx to DAG and have it back in 2 weeks.

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), September 03, 2001.

I agree about Don Goldberg. He's always been very quick, relatively inexpensive and did excellent work for me.

-- Bud (budcook@attglobal.net), September 03, 2001.

He was eight weeks for me a month or so ago :-( But he did a fine job :-)

As for the second body, I'd buy what's cheap, but it wouldn't be a Bessa. The times I carry my IIIa and M4-2 at the same time, I'm always cursing keeping the adapters straight (with the right lenses-- you have an extra step everytime you take a lens off the IIIa finding the lens that has it's adapter on it at that moment). I just bought an M2 as a backup, because it was cheap, but if I had opportunity to buy a M4-2, M4-P or M2 all at the same price, I'd choose one of the first two. However, I don't think you're going to find one for $650, and the $300 difference would buy another lens (that was my logic when I bought the M2!)

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), September 03, 2001.

Josh, my first advice would be to bite the bullet and get an M6. But you stated you've had two and didn't like them as much as the CL. So why not simply buy another CL?

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), September 03, 2001.

Relative to the issue of getting an M6, I would have wanted to buy one, but the nicest thing about the older models is that you can sometimes buy them for half the price or less, of an M6. My "new" M2, for instance, cost me $565, plus a CLA. Buying a used Pentax, 50% doesn't mean much, but on a Leica it's a lot of $$$ to pay for a meter--essentially the ONLY difference!

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), September 03, 2001.

DAG did quote me a slightly shorter time, but not by much. I should probably call both of them again and see what the turnaround is looking like these days.

The M6........I dunno. I am really drawn to them in a lot of ways. Especially the black ones. I think part of what is making my manual RF shooting so much fun these days, is that 99% of my other photography is digital. So the retro tactile feel of working with real film (and lenses that don't have 50% focal length added to them) is really pretty nice. But I'm worried that once again I won't like it very much. And it is a lot more money than the other options. Maybe if I felt assured that Leica was actually going to go through with a digital "m" plan. But seeing as how they have just sat on their ass for so long about everything else, I doubt that will actually happen within the next 2-3 years.

My main reason for not getting another CL is that someday I'd like to have a 35 lux again (or if not that, a cron). I foolishly sold the one that I bought with my first M6, and now I wish I had it back. So I don't really want to deal with the "imagine a 35mm frame on the outside edges of the CL's 40mm frame". Plus, I don't think that the 'lux will mount on the CL without hitting the meter arm. I think I'm going to have a look at that M2 next time I'm in the store.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), September 03, 2001.

My 35 'lux mounts fine on my CL - no problems. I would love to have a 35 'cron but I can't bring myself to spend the money when I have 2 40mm lenses now. I'd buy another CL in your situation but it's your choice.

-- mark (mramra@qwest.net), September 03, 2001.

Josh, I've had an M2 for 40 years, and still love it. You sound disinclined to buy anything else, and the M2 is available now, when you want it. It has an uncluttered finder. You want another 35 Lux, for which the M2 is fine. I say go for it.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), September 03, 2001.

Josh:

Get that M2 for $650. That is a good price for that camera in user condition. When it needs a CLA, you can get it done by Leica USA for about $300. Then it will be good for another 20 years! If you change your mind, you can always sell it at the same price! It will be much cheaper than a $1200 used M6!

The Bessa T is not a bad idea if you want a second body. You will get a brand new camera with a built in light meter for only about $450 (see www.cameraquest.com). But you will have to buy separate viewfinders for the lenses. This you need to try before you buy. I was very apprehensive about using a separate viewfinder for my newly acquired Leica 21mm ASPH lens on my M6 TTL body. After a month of regularly using the lens, I have discovered it is very easy and quick to focus using the M6 viewfinder, and then compose the picture with the external 21mm v

-- Muhammad Chishty (applemac97@aol.com), September 03, 2001.

Sorry! My previous post got truncated somehow! What I meant to say in the end was that not everyone likes using external viewfinders. There is always some parallax error, and what you get on film is always different from what you see in the viewfinder.............

-- Muhammad Chishty (applemac97@aol.com), September 04, 2001.

Josh

If you have tried an M6 before and you did not like it, then it would seem foolish to try again. If you did not get on with the M6, I see no reason to think you would get on with an M2. I think I would check out the Bessa-R., which are a good deal. You could use it with the 35mm Ultron - which would be a pretty capable outfit and would be a cheaper stand in compared to your 'lux 35mm dream. I notice though that you have struck the Bessa-R off your list already.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), September 04, 2001.

I decided against the bessa R only because I don't have any LTM lenses other that my 25/4. So it wouldn't be very useful as a backup body. But other than that, it's a great little camera.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), September 04, 2001.

What didn't you like about the M6?

My first M was an M3 ... I didn't like the clumsy, heavy goggles on the 35mm lens, the slow rewind, the slow loading. Sold it. Next M was an M4-P ... Liked the body but at the time the mix of lenses I had (28/2.8, 50/2, early 90/2) just didn't work well for me. For one reason or another I sold the whole kit. Had a CL with 15 and 40 lenses for a bit, liked it a lot but found the loading a pain and the meter funky. Sold it in trade for the third M I bought, an M6TTL with (35/2 and 90/2.8, in addition to the 15). Very happy with it, happy enough that I acquired another M4-P body, 24 and 50mm lenses. Now I have too much equipment ...

Why would an M2 be better than an M6? Other than for reasons of cost? I'm not sure I understand.

Godfrey

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), September 04, 2001.

M2 vs. M6

Yeah, the reason is mostly cost. I didn't really dislike the M6, I just like the CL a lot more (except for the sketchy meter). I would like to try the simple finder setup of the M2 (although the film loading is a little annoying). But, weirdly, I think I'm leaning towards getting another CL. Even though that will make my summilux lust hard to satisfy.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), September 04, 2001.

Josh, if you can luck onto an M2R, it has the rapid loading system of the M4/M6.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), September 04, 2001.

I hab the same question a while ago but viceversa I use a M6 and i had a a CL as auxiliary body. But this one was like yout with a bad meter. the Quotation of LEICA in Solms for fixing the problem killed this one i returned it to the dealer for konibalzing parts. Right now i am thinking of the BESSA T as a resting place for my Elmarit 21mm because it needs the detachable Viewfinder anyways and togehter with another 90mm viewfinder it will give me a proper scaled frame for the longer distances Iread somewhere that the BESSA T's Rangefinder magnifies 1.5 times ma be i can use it without the 'third eye' these re my thoughts to the same question. Maybe there will be somebody out there able to confirm that a etz Elmarit 21mm would perform together with a BESSA T I would appreciate a direct E-mail inthis matter because i have difficulties to find this forum again. Thanks to All Pro's I am Pretty much an Amateur have a nice day

-- Thomas Burrack (tburrack@bwc.org), September 19, 2001.