I would like to share with you my xperiences of using the M6 for a couple of months. Especially for those looking reading this group because they are contemplating the purchase of a Leica RF camera.

After a long road I finally ended up with an M6, a 50mm summicron and an empty bank account. My decision to move to the Leica was driven by a passion for razor sharp pictures and a preference to shoot shooting wide open.

Before moving to the Leica I had upgraded to a Nikon F100 from a Canon Eos 100 with a 28-80 zoom because of the better glass that I believe Nikon had. The quality of the lenses was indeed excellent and for a while I was very happy with the Nikon system. In fact I was totally sold on the benefit of superior optics, so I added lens after lens. My Nikon system now consists of the F100 +MB15 battery pack, AFS 2.8 28-70, AF ED 80-200, AFD 28, Micro Nikkor 60mm and AFD 85mm 1.8, and SB28 flash.

The quality of the camera and lenses I do not dispute. It is excellent and the flash photography with a Nikon is fantastic. However the stuff broke my back. I don't mind the weight when your shooting, I even find the mass a bonus when shooting, but it's between the photo's that the mass is really cumbersome. Try going on vacation with all that, plus three little kids, buggies etc. Try bringing it on a business trip where you might have a couple of free hours that you can spend shooting. In the end, it just doesn't work. Fine for pro's that are shooting an assignment, but not for me.

With my frustration growing ever more my interest in the Leica grew as well. I had never seriously considered it because I believed I couldn't work without the auto everything. The Leica Mantra that the camera allowed more creativity because of it's simplicity I completely dismissed. How could that be?

My believe was that since the Nikon was auto everything I was able to focus on the picture taking 100% and let the camera worry about the exposure. (I use it on Aperture Priority all the time)

I could not believe that less automation would allow me to be more creative since it would force me to a) work out the exposure myself and b) focus myself?

Well, I stand corrected.

After my purchase I decided I would shoot with the Leica exclusively so I could learn to use it properly before I would allow myself to come to any conclusion. During these months I liked the Leica size and weight but never felt like a Leicaphile that could only shoot with Leica henceforth. The film loading was cumbersome and slow, but has improved with practice. The viewfinder flare drove me nuts, and still does, but I learned to work with it. The focussing can be difficult some times, and never felt as quick as the Nikon. Yeah I liked the results but it all felt cumbersome and slow compared to my Nikon.

Until last week I picked up the Nikon again to take pictures of my son's birthday. With him running around and the light being low I figured I'd be better of using the Nikon, AF and flash. Here are my findings.

- The AF system limits my composition to placing my objects in the AF areas. (yes I know one can use the AF lock, but what's the purpose of AF then, I never got the hang of that and preferred to use manual focus) - AF slows me down on occasion, the lens hunts or is not critically sharp you wait for the lens to focus or recompose to direct the AF sensor to a higher contrast element where it can focus on, which in turn limits your composition. Off course manual focus is not quicker either but before using the Leica I never realized the AF actually slowed me down some times. - For difficult subjects like running kids, using hyperfocal focussing is quicker and better then AF focussing. This was a major eye opener for me, since I never believed I could do better myself then a top of the range AF system. But look at it this way. When shooting kids outside using AF the AF system can pick a subject way in the background or foreground, causing your focus to be way off. With hyperfocal you just set the area you want to have in focus and all the kids running either in the fore- or background are ignored. Kids are fast but not that fast. With the Leica I cannot keep up with the Nikon if it does lock on, but using hyperfocal focussing I also know what area is in focus and that never leads to totally out of focus shots that one can have with an AF system. The Nikon is far superior for shooting wide open in those circumstances though, but this requires some effort to ensure your topic stays locked. I prefer the compositional freedom but that is a tradeoff. - No matter how good the matrix measurement system is, I find that using an incident light meter gives much more consistent and predictable results. - Even the internal light meter works better for me because I know what it measures so I can compensate accordingly (although I would prefer to see the actual measurement area in the viewfinder, rather then guessing it)

So all in all I have learned to love my Leica. It is an acquired taste like good wine, but once you've got it, you will not settle for less. It is true that many of the things mentioned above can be done with the Nikon as well. You can use hyperfocal focussing or manual focussing, you can ignore the matrix metering and go manual with an incident meter or use spot or center metering, but somehow it just doesn't feel comfortable on the Nikon. Especially the lightmetering and information in the display distracts you and it's like a little voice calling out continuously

my $1000 plus and highly acclaimed lightmetering sytem says f8 who are you to set f4….are you sure…are you sure….

So I have decided to keep the Leica and use it for everything under 90mm and use the Nikon for longer lenses only (which makes me wonder why I would bother keeping it really)

-- Bas Wip (bas@baswip.com), October 15, 2001

Answers

Bas:

Well said!

I have come to the sane conclusion myself. I am now down to one SLR body - the F5 - and three lenses - the 80-400 VS, 24-85 macro zoom, and a 50 f1.4 afd - AND I'm going to get rid of the 50 f1.4 because I never use it now that I have the M... On the other hand, my M stable grows continuously, with multiple lenses in the same focal length because I like them for different reasons - something I would have never considered in the Nikon system, but somehow seems natural for the Leica - go figure!

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), October 15, 2001.

Bas

Personally I find I can focus and get sharply focussed pictures much quicker with my R6.2 and 50mm Summicron or 80mm Summilux than any AF system I have tried to date on moving subjects (such as child portraits). In this case it betters the M6 too, as you can use the edge of the screen to focus. I have the microprism only screen. The eyepiece diopter needs to be adjusted for your eyesight of course. With wider lenses the M has the advantage, no question, and at 50mm it is a tie (personally, though I feel more comfortable with the R here), unless in very low light in which case the M wins.

AF, I personally find is rather overrated. So my point is to remember that there are still MF SLRs too so the comparison is not just AF SLRs vs the M. Also people often compare AF zooms with Ms. The comparison is actually AF or MF fixed focal lengths with Ms to get a more meaningful comparison.

Note I am only taking about my experiences with moving subjects here.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), October 15, 2001.

I hope to get a Leica R3 for this Xmas (it's in the Leica repair shop waiting to be bought by me) as well as add a Nikon F (classic banger I have to admit) to my collection. I do have to admit that I like that Canon Snappy LXII P and S camera. It's cute and definitely has a wacky shape. I guess that it's cool especially whenever I'm stuck without a M6 and R6.2 and R8!!! :) hahaha

Alfie

-- Albert Wang (albert.wang@ibx.com), October 15, 2001.

The weight of a slr is the problem.I find when I use my slrs I want lots of lenses,not need,want.I find the Leica is slow...I need to pick my battles more carefully.Hence I get way better results.As its small and light,only use a 50mm for carrying around.The old collapsible Summicron.Other night I finished work real late in Toronto and on way home found a street parade,Asian Festival with people and kids carrying lanterns.No meter with me,had my old M3 and guessed the exposures.Perfect prints.What I wanted.Flash would have frozen the images.They are blurred,@ eighth of second.The moment though is what I wanted.I hate weight.I become a schlepper not a photographer.A spare roll or two,maybe a longer lens and I am ready. The M6 is not that easy to load.I hate the @#$%$#@ flare.I hope soon to add a wideangle.Not sure which...

-- jason gold (leeu72@hotmail.com), October 15, 2001.

OK, Bas ! Wellcome . . . Make the next a M3.

Cheers

-Iván

-- Iván Barrientos M (ingenieria@simltda.tie.cl), October 15, 2001.

There are trade-offs with any camera system. If one has the luxury to own more than one, the "right tool for the right job" approach works. If not, then compromises must be made. If I was limited to one system, I believe I would go with an AF SLR, simply because it has the most array of features of which any one or several can always be turned off if they get in the way.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), October 15, 2001.

I went with rangefinders for the same reasons, Bas: lighter weight, simplicity of controls, desire to simplify. It is a joy to take just one rangefinder camera with a lens on a long trip: to have a light bag, to never have to make decisions about which camera and lenses to take along each day, to just focus on making pictures. And SLRs are better for certain things, but I find myself using them less and less. For me, an M6 w/35mm lens covers most needs.

-- Douglas Kinnear (douglas.kinnear@colostate.edu), October 15, 2001.

I justified my returm to a rangefinder with one lens: The Voigtlander 15mm Heliar. I have dozen Spotmatic bodies and have wanted a 15mm. In screw mount the lens is impossble to find and would cost $1,000. A new 15mm Heliar is now less than $400.Decison made.

So now I have a IIIF, a IIIg, and 4 lenses. 15mm, 21mm, 50mm, and 90mm. But I still use my Spotmatics for long shots!

Tony

-- Tony Oresteen (aoresteen@lsqgroup.com), October 15, 2001.

Bas

I also bought a M6TTL with 3E, but before I bought it it had the opportunity to test one. And I made the same experience as many of M6 user have made also. The flare can make life realy hard. And also to load the film is in certain circumstances an adventure.

To supress the flare in the view finder I also bought the SHADE at http://www.konermann.net/shade.html .

So I let my R8 at home and tryed my new M6 so equiped at a vacation trip in Rome.

The camera worked very properly and I must confess that I never had the feeling of being unsecure because of mirror slap or so. Focusing is simple and with the 3E there is no time vaste of changing lense. I had no issues with flare and only framing was sometime a bit difficult because I wear glasses. The only thing I felt unsecure was the metering but obviously my instinct lead me automatically to the right metering how the picture showed mw afterwards.

Ciao

-- Salvatore Reitano (reitanosalvatore@hotmail.com), October 16, 2001.

I too am a M6TTL+35cron newbie, coming from an FM2 background. I had reached the point of never taking out the FM2 - a roll of film would sit in it for 3+ months. I usually opted for taking my wife's Yashica T4 (an excellent P&S, IMO). I hated lugging around the Nikon gear and always feeling conspicuous when using it. Since I've had the M6, I'm developing rolls every 1-2 weeks and carrying the camera daily. The adjustment to the rangefinder has taken awhile, but now I'm much more aware of DOF and pre-focusing. I'm getting pretty darn accurate with pre-focusing - my wife thinks I'm nuts, when we watch TV in the evenings I'll sit there pre-focusing on various objects in the room - she calls me a "Leica Geek"!

-- Ken Geter (kgeter@yahoo.com), October 16, 2001.

Sounds like you've found another tool to bring your photography to life, Bas. Enjoy it, shoot a lot.

Don't worry too much about acquiring a lot of lenses. A wide or super wide lens in addition to your 50mm would be a nice addition when you want a fresh look at the world. But ya know, it's more important that you SEE ... :-)

Godfrey

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), October 16, 2001.

Bas, I read your post with a large dose of deja vu. The long road and empty bank account lead, for me, to an M4 with a 5cm/2.8 Elmar and a couple of Voigtländer lenses (too broke to get the Leitz glass right now) and a Voigtländer VC meter...this after using an F4 for a couple of years and F2s before that.

I took this rig with me on a two week holiday from 28 Sept to 13 October. Made for a nice small bag that left room for an old Ansco folder to get the MF shots :)...that small bag was a revelation after being used to wrestling the big bag around. I picked up my Nikon bag when I got home - oof!

And the holiday photos? I am very pleased with them. Two weeks of intensive using of the M4 set up has put me hard on the rangefinder side. A lot of my other Nikon stuff might be in danger of being moved.

Saving money for a 'cron 35mm now...

-- C Zeni (clzeni@mindspring.com), October 16, 2001.

Prior to purchasing my used Leica M6 .72 and my lone lens, a 50 summicron, I was (and still am) a Nikon shooter, primarily F100 with an array of prime lenses (my favorite two are 50. 1.4 and 85 1.8)

What I love shooting is dance performances. Rehearsals are good too but stage lighting makes all the difference.

Last night was my first dance performance with my Leica M6. I had planned to shoot with both cameras mounted with my 50mm's. Same film in each (Ilford Delta 3200 or Fuji Superia 1600). I wanted to compare the two and also I wanted to use teh spot meter in my F100 to determine exposure. I still don't trust my ability to read my M6 meter accurately in difficult lighting situations.

Anyway, as luck would have it, two minutes into the dance, my F100 dies on me. I panicked, couldn't get it to work (it kept flashing battery failure, but I had fresh rechargeable batteries in it)

So, I shot the whole two hour performance with my Leica, frantically rewinding and reloading in the dark and praying that I was metering the scenes right every time the lights changed (and for those of you who watch dance -- specifically modern and jazz-- you know that lights change pretty much every few minutes.)

I haven't seen the all results yet. My black and white negatives look pretty good. I think the trick is to overexpose a little with the Leica. With the F100, I would have spotmetered the dancers' faces and other bright spots to get a light reading. My color rolls are still at the lab.

Reloading isn't as bad as people say when you're rushed. I didn't have a single misload out of six rolls. I'm pretty sure I loaded in the dark in about a minute, including rewind time. Prior to this, I took great care each time I loaded my film thinking it was harder than it was.

The camera gets slick in my sweaty palms when I'm shooting non-stop. I'm now debating whether I want a grip. I like the feel of a grip but I don't like the look.

I love the floating framelines in my viewfinder. I can keep track of the dancers much more easily.

Non of the dancers heard my Leica. And usually the dancers can hear my F100.

Manual focusing on the Leica isn't any harder than with the F100. But it's harder to do vertical shots with the Leica than my F100, which has a vertical grip.

Also, I have to remember to manually change my ISO rating on my Leica each time I changed film. The first time I went from 3200 to 1600, I didn't change it rating until halfway through the color roll.

Anyway, sorry for the long entry, but I thought anyone who used Leica's for performance shooting might be able to relate.

Thanks.

-- victor virtucio (danzfotog@yahoo.com), October 18, 2001.

I gave up on SLRs a few years ago (had an EOS3 and a backpack full of L-lenses), but the weight made me use it less and less. Sold it off for a nice price and got the Contax G2 kit w/ 28, 45 and 90mm lenses and a small flash (TLA200). At first I liked the AF, AE and the motor, but now I'm not so impressed. I had been thinking about an M6 when I got the G2, but Lica was just too expencive. I have grown more and more discontent with the viewfinder and the noisy focusing of the G2. Now I have two M6 TTLs (a .72 and a .85) that I use most of the time, and only use the G2 when I need the speed and convenience of AF.

-- Snorre Selmer (snorre@digitaledge.no), May 08, 2002.