I'm the happy owner of a Hasselblad and two lenses. Love the manual camera thing. Lately I've become interested in the M6 TTL for an off-the-cuff carry along camera. I'd use it mostly for b/w casual shots of family and friends, maybe some travel photos. No huge enlargements (that's why I have the Blad), just small prints as gifts or for personal satisfaction.

Anyway, when I researched my move to medium format three years ago, I handled a Mamiya M7 at the camera shop. Two words: hated it. Specifically, the rangefinder window and alignment of the two images. Mind you, I was new to the medium format and rangefinder worlds. Since I only spent a couple of minutes messing with it, maybe that wasn't long enough.

I suppose I'm asking how different is an M6TTL from an M7? I like the IDEA of the Leica, but I don't know if it's ONLY the idea. I don't know anyone who owns one, and I can't find rentals in the immediate area (Richmond, VA to Washington, DC).

I suppose renting an M7 in DC would acquaint me with the rangefinder mindset, but will it prepare me for a Leica? In other words, am I comparing apples and oranges? Any advice would be appreciated.

-- Eicher (eic@co.henrico.va.us), December 20, 2001

Answers

Eicher:

This is my opinion only; others will disagree. Differences: M6 is much smaller; rangefinder is better, lenses are better; more film choices in 35 mm; much wider choice of lenses. Mamiya 7; less chance of finder flair; better quality negatives [they are bigger after all].

Others will not agree, but the two cameras have a different purpose. They can't be interchanged. Apples and oranges, as you say.

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), December 20, 2001.

The stealthiest camera for street photography HAS to go to the Rolliflex. If you've never used a twin-lens reflex for the incognito stuff you should try it. I have an old Seagull (Chinese knockoff of the Rolliflex) that I use once in awhile for the hell of it. The most disarming camera out there!

Too bad TLR's don't deal with flare all that well. But then again, I never used a proper hood with them.

Sorry to get off topic....

-- John Chan (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), December 20, 2001.

John:

Agreed. I have Rollei. Still the perspective that you get from a waist level camera is totally different that what you get from and eye level camera. The difference is amazing.

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), December 20, 2001.

A lot of people will disagree but I really don't think the Mamiya lenses compare with german lenses (leica, zeiss etc. ) I know they are admirably distortion-free but the colours are "wrong" to me. It's like the difference between canon and leica - a lot of people say they say they see no difference - lucky them: if I saw no difference life would probably be a lot easier (!) As for handling- you can't put one of those massive m7s in a pocket - it doesn't have that "extension of the arm/eye" thing going for it which increasingly is the point of the leica m for me. There's an argument for having both - tho' I'd rather use a Hassleblad when I need a larger format/ for tripod work...

-- steve (stephenjjones@btopenworld.com), December 20, 2001.

If you want to get acquainted with the RF way, by all means spend your rental money on a Canonet QL17, Konica Auto S2, Minolta HiMatic, or Olympus SP35, etc. Some of these do very nicely, and they might end up being your beater back up camera after you've gotten a hang of it.

-- Tse-Sung (tsesung@yahoo.com), December 20, 2001.

I know that everyone here will shake their finger at me (because a leica is "so" different from a M7), but because you say "Two words: hated it. Specifically, the rangefinder window and alignment of the two images" I predict that a Leica isn't going to be any better for you. It's the same split-patch focusing. and while, yes, the viewfinder is better. It isn't all that much better. It's still just a little patch to look through.

Find an old Cannonette to try. But I think if you hate RF focusing, you'll probably hate it no matter what the camera. If I were you I might get a Nikon N80 or a Canon G2. I could very well be wrong, so you should try for yourself. Maybe one of the people here lives in your area and could meet up with you for an afternoon.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), December 20, 2001.

Eicher:

I used to own 2 M7's and the 43, 65 and 150 lenses. First, the lenses were awesome, especially the 43 and 150. Second, I hated the RF patch and framelines in that camera and sold the whole system --

Hence, I avoided any other RF cameras for about three years, until my friend forced his M3 and a roll of film on me -- I now own 3 M6's and about 8 or 9 M lenses, and I can say without a doubt, the M6 is a dream to use compared to the M7.

FWIW, the M7 was even quiter than the M6, and the M7's non-TTL AE meter worked *very* well, even with slide film.

:) Cheers,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), December 20, 2001.

You may not be a rangefinder type of person if you didn't like the way the Mamiya focused, its a good chance you will not like the way a Leica M does either. I'd take a look at a Contax Aria SLR where you could have a small, compact SLR with Zeiss glass and focus/framing more to what you are used to.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), December 20, 2001.

I think the "Hate It" is a psychological perspective. I have two Hassie's with four lenses. Hassie is great! It has a dstinct purpose. I too thought tha RF was acutally a draw back. I bought an M6, basically because a friend told me to. I bought an M6 and a 50mm Cron f2. The feal of the camera was wierd. After a while the feel became so nice! It no goes everywhere with me.

Range Finders (esp. Leica) have a long Range Finder Base. When you focus with a Leica you are actually looking at the edges of the image as the come together. It is an angular perspective when focusing. The system uses a triangulation method. This method when used is 10 times for accurate than a Hassie or any SLR. Especially when dealing with focus when indoors and/or in low light situations. Erwin Puts actually did a large study on this ( http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/technics/rfaccuracy.html ) look it up!.

Leica's are small and use a smaller format neg....... but when looking at a leica neg the texture, the contrast, the FEEL...I am a professional photographer and my Hassie will not do what my leica will do.

The camera is so quite! no mirror locking up! no vibrations! People look at an M6 (average people) and they do not think the camera is a serious camera. it lloks like a play toy to them......IT IS NOT! because of this, when shooting at a wedding all eyes are on the bride first then the photographer. If I want to sneek up on people to capture true candids, to capture that true photojournalistic quality, the Hassie is SO BIG that people see me coming and completely stop what they are doing to watch me. People stop acting natural and stare! This bother me. It iterupts people. It interupts the feel, the mood, the shot. I employ my Leica for the candids of both the bride and groom and guests.

The fast lenses! they are great. The speed that the body adds. Stop and think about it. Cannon has a 50mm F1.0....SUPER FAST! Because of the mirror the slowest shutterspeed you can use is 1/60th sec. hand held. Leica has a 50mm F1.0 (totally different than the Cannon) but because the Leica does not have a mirror you can use a 1/30th sec. shutter speed. ONE STOP FASTER! Then consider the light you loose in the viewfinder of the Connon; if you are shooting a f1.0 and 1/60th how will you be able to accurately focus? So the Leica system is really TWO STOPS FASTER!

Think about it. You have a leica...people (average blokes) already don't take the canera seriously...it is dark outside...you are shooting at f1.0 and 1/30th...people don't hear the shutter...people don't see a flash...people think "those pictures will never turn out. But you get perfectly exposed pictures...perfectly focused...pictures you could never have captures with any other system...KEEP YOUR HASSIE...BUY A LEICA...YOU WILL NOT REGRET IT....EVER!

-- Rob Schopke (schopke@attbi.com), December 20, 2001.

Yes, I disagree with the comments that M7's lenses are not in the league of the best lenses available today. I own 50, 80 and 150 and they are just AWESOME. The sharpness, colour and details are just absoultely top-notch. I also used to own a Hasselblad 503CX with the 80 Planar. The Mamiya's are at least equal to CZ's to my bare eyes including colour accuracy. Other folks in the Photonet forum swear that Mamiya's lenses are even better than Hasselblad/CZ's! Coupled with the larger negative size, I can surly say that pictures taken by Mamiya M7 will have an edge over Leica's.

Being said that, comparison of M7 to M6 is meaningless and they're of different format. However, one thing they have in common is they're both RF. If you do not feel comfortable with M7, you will do the same with M6.

-- 806072 (leefred@cadvision.com), December 20, 2001.

Oops! Too much excited in posting the message. My name should not be the #######'s

-- Fred Lee (leefred@cadvision.com), December 20, 2001.

I've got leica M's and 120 6 x 7 cm rangefinders - the results from both are very different so i use them for their own particular picture making qualities. The Mam 7ii is a big improvwement on the first model when it comes to the viewfinder window. Personally i love quality and feel of the Plaubels 67 and 670 (the spot meter of the Plaubel is very accurate) sadly both i'm having to retire (or at least use less) and use the Mam 7 as they are spending too long in the repair shop after each trip away.....

-- Simon Larbalestier (larby@simon-larbalestier.co.uk), December 20, 2001.

Eicher:

I shoot almost all M Leicas now. And I have tried the Mamiya 6 and 7. I love the Ms, but, like you, didn't like the "eye feel" of the Mamiya finders. So I don't think the Mamiya will help you prepare for the Leica very well. "Apples and oranges". You'll need to try the "real McCoy" to be sure.

I'm not sure I can quantify what was different. My impression was that the Mamiya finder was bright but not as contrasty as the Leica - that the squarer medium format frames were harder to "take in" than the more compact rectangular 35 format shape - that the Leica RF patch was either larger or at least had more "presence" in the frame. With the much more compact Leica my hands and eyes feel more tightly tied together into one working photographic unit, while with the sprawling Mamiya my hands and eyes felt too disconnected and separated.

JOMO.

Andy Piper

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), December 20, 2001.

Eisher, I know the feeling, I had the same the first time I looked through an M6 finder... I found that I went throught the universal phychological process when confronted with something new and different : rejection, acceptation, assimilation, and finally it becomes your own idea :-) I now own an M6 and it is with me everyday, every moment. What happened to me first is that I tried to use it as an SLR, and for that, nothing beats an SLR ! Everything said above regarding low light, tc... is true, but the most important is the incredible feeling when you start to ajust everything without thinking. I am starting to ajust speed and aperture before looking through the finder and at the moment I'right about half the time, and when I'm wrong it is never by more than 2 stops, most of the time about a stop. I was never able to do so with my Canons and Nikons in 15 years ! The fact is, I did not even try :-) Focusing is more and more the same. I start to be able to pre-focus quite well, most of the time the error is in the DOF. I only own the M6 for three months. I think in a few months I'll be quicker than with my EOS 3. I'm exploring the low light photography with mixed results at this moment, but I surely am a very beginner :-)

English is not my mother language, so I hope this post is not too confusing to read.

-- Stéphane Bosman (stephane.bosman@2ci.net), December 21, 2001.

Eicher

There are some places you can rent Ms. You can in Manhattan for example.

R/fs can take a lot of getting used to - the image in the finder is always very nice and bright and the framelines are great as long as you do not have to move your eye around to see the edges as is the case on the 28mm on the 0.72. The hardest thing in many ways is getting used to r/f focussing. While accurate, you can only focus in the middle of the frame and when you move to frame the shot, you have no visual confirmation that you are still in focus as you do with a reflex. This is a disadvantage. Also of course there is no way to preview depth of field effects. There are still parallax issues. But the quietness of the camera and the silky smooth release are superb and ultimately you come to adjust to its disadvantages and come to appreciate its advantages too. I find that the preview lever on an M is a formidable tool allowing you to see which lens is best for the shot in question without having to actually change the lens.

You really do need to try it out first though. By the way, if it is not good for you then there is no reason to feel bad - many people actually agree with you. Not everyone is a fan of the r/f. If you like telephotos or extreme wideangles then the M is tougher. I think for the 35-90mm range (which is after all 90% of "normal" photography) they are hard to beat for everyday use.

For what it is worth I think the M7 experience is not dissimilar to the M6 experience. For MF, I too prefer Hasselblad.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), December 21, 2001.