so in my quest for a black Leica M6TTL i've come across a number of Leica M4-P:s for sale. It seems possible to pick one up in good shape for $700-$750.

Any users of them out there? How hard is it not to have any type of TTL metering?

cheers,

-- Patrick (svenburg@yahoo.com), February 15, 2002

Answers

Mine was much smoother than my M6. a handheld meter is no problem to use, or have a look at the cosina clip on meter.

They are a good 'users' leica

B

http://www.35mmf8.org

-- Brian (briandavidstevens@talk21.com), February 15, 2002.

Ditto on what Brian said. My M4-P is more mechanically smooth than my M6. The lack of a meter doesn't bother me. I use a handheld meter or guess (in fact, my ability to meter scenes in my head has improved dramatically since acquiring the M4-P).

-- Richard (rvle@yahoo.com), February 15, 2002.

Ahhhh! What an opportunity! The M4-P is simply wonderful for many reasons.

IMO it is an advantage not to have in body metering, I love the Leica for it's lack of unnecessary features, electronics and finder distractions. This is unfourtunatly the opposite to the current direction Leica is taking - OK, offer an in-built meter for those who find it useful; but now we have the TTL electronics (with it's ironic restrictions on flash flexibility) with more finder distractions and soon the M7 electronic wonder which will surely kill the M6 one day.

If like me you dislike chrome bodies, the M4-P becomes the most desirable and pure modern M (if a black M4 is out of reach). No meter, no electronics just an ergonomic marvel.

I simply find that the way one works with a Leica M is hugely compatible with a handheld meter (and in-compatible with an in-built one) learn to read the light or guage a few light levels, transfer that reading and stick to it.

Remember, it's only for the last 16 odd years the M had the meter, everyone managed fine before that, still today the majority of pro's will use a handheld meter in preference to whatever camera system in- built meter at their disposal.

And of course that old chestnut, QC - this argument goes back and forth but gradually the materials used and skill of employees seems to be on a downward spiral - quite frankly the M4-P is made of better materials and with more attention to QC than todays products.

And it has the Leitz name on it - just to really get the flamers going!

Patrick, the bottom line is - as a usable camera it is the best value of any Leica available today.

The only way to measure the light with the in-built meter is to bring the camera to the eye, adjust the shutter or aperture and watch the arrows - impossible and very conspicious when shooting on the fly.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 15, 2002.

I bought one as a back-up to an M6, and to carry around everywhere without having to worry so much about it getting stolen, lost or knocked about in my briefcase or jacket pocket. Subjectively it feels (even) more solid than the M6. If could only have one it would be the M6, as the meter is really intuitive and useful. However, I think the M4-P is the best value as an entry into Leica M, and wouldn't hesitate to recommend it. They are fairly recent, cost no more than any of the earlier models, and have the full set of viewfinder frames. I normally use it with color neg and no meter. My exposure guide consists of the following table taped below the rewind:

3 6 9 12 2

-- Robin Barnsley (rb@jet.uk), February 15, 2002.

Most good lightmeters are almost as big as the M6 itself. Plus if you're shooting slide film you need to meter more often and have a meter with a narrow reading angle to be effective. If you don't already own a good handheld meter, add around $200 to the cost of the M4-P and you're approaching M6 territory. Do you wear glasses? The M4-P has a metal eyepiece that will scratch them. You can get a stick-on protector for a few bucks but if you want something permanent, an M6-style eyepiece will set you back around $70. I've saved the most important for last: the last time the M4-P appeared in the catalog was 16 years ago but you can bet the production stopped at least 2-3 years earlier. With most bodies in the 20-year range, if they haven't been serviced recently (or have been, but not by Leica or DAG or Sherry or another Leica-trained person)you should figure $200-300 for a CLA, now or soon. Bottom-line, for other than a backup body, a late-model M6 Classic or M6TTL is more economical than it seems at first blush. If the rumored M7 debuts in a few weeks, by year end (if they are actually in stores by then) there should be a temporary spurt of used M6's on the market.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), February 15, 2002.

contd. Now I see why so many people never quite finish their post - it's too easy too submit prematurely! Anyway, I have a little table which shows suitable shutter/aperture combinations for the values 3, 6, 9, 12 that my Weston V meter would be showing if I had it with me. For some reason I find it easier to think like that, and can usually get it +-1.

-- Robin Barnsley (rb@jet.uk), February 15, 2002.

Jay - first of all no offence intended :) now, odd comment, I thought you use and recommend (the very small) Sekonic L208 - I don't know how many people really use slide film, these days, certainly with neg film a basic meter or the experience in your head will suffice.

After all your shooting, surely you can look at the sky and say: "Yes, 1/250 at F4..." etc!

As a concession, I would recommend an M6 (original Leitz classic) as the next best option - certainly a neat solution in incorporating the meter, but later non-upgrades like the enlarged body, TTL gubbins and minor viewfinder mag. changes - no thanks, the .72 M4-P is the last of the (still) great M's after the M4.

M4-P PRODUCTION ended in '86, you are right, but in the light of continuining recent QC horrors I would in all honesty trust my 1982, immaculate, tried and tested, perfectly functioning well built M4-P than any new M from Solms!

And who ever chose a camera because it had a rubber eyepiece!

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 15, 2002.

I heartly agree with the posters on the M4-P, it is the best 'bang for buck' M body you can buy at present. It is marginally smaller than the M6 (2mm in height) and to my mind feels better in the hand. If you do go for one a late model is preferable, and if as late as mine, you get the M6 top plate with a rubber eyepiece and the plastic strap guards.

-- Steve Barnett (barnet@globalnet.co.uk), February 15, 2002.

Giles, as usual it really is a matter of application and you're right that shooting neg is more forgiving than slide. I think lots of people shoot slide (I do, anyway) simply because even if your final product is a jpg, slide is so easy to review and select. And it's easy to store and find slides later.

For me personally, then, I have little choice, the M6 is the only one I can use. Unfortunately!

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), February 15, 2002.

this current one I was looking at is a late 1981 without the strap guards or improved vf hole. i don't need glasses. somewhat hesitant if I have the skills to judge the exposure without a meter, and concerned that using a hand-held meter will add a lot of time to each exposure.

-- Patrick (svenburg@yahoo.com), February 15, 2002.

I try never to use a meter any more since I found this link to The Ultimate Exposure Guide. I do carry around a sheet of paper with hand holdable EVs and the corresponding shutter speeds and fstops. I compare the description to the lighting situation, set the exposure and fire away. My slides turn out great.

-- Chad Hahn (thehahns@cornhusker.net), February 15, 2002.

Lets' try this again.

-- Chad Hahn (thehahns@cornhusker.net), February 15, 2002.

I was trying to link to http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm but was unable to get it to work. Sorry about that.

Chad Hahn

-- Chad Hahn (thehahns@cornhusker.net), February 15, 2002.

My first Leica was an M4-P. Got great results, a hand held meter sometimes (I find) seems to streamline the whole process. Sold it, still regret it...Best,

-- Marke Gilbert (Bohdi137@aol.com), February 15, 2002.

...don't know how many people really use slide film...

i use slide film more often [than b&w] on my M6...and i bet a lot of posters here do load slide film on their Leica Ms

-- Dexter Legaspi (dalegaspi@hotmail.com), February 15, 2002.

Patrick - "...concerned that using a hand-held meter will add a lot of time to each exposure."

If you are used to this way of working with an AE/AF SLR you will find it is not really suited to the M, to meter each shot is un- necessary and s-l-o-w with the in-built meter.

Regarding slide film, I too use it sometimes but so what? - as I say a handheld incident meter is a far more effective and reliable tool than an in-built reflective meter ESPECIALLY for slide film!!!

Besides in-built meters are 'relatively' recent, especially in M's.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 15, 2002.

Well, no, Giles. When you've learnt to use the M6 meter, it is quicker and more convenient and less invasive to use than a handheld meter. I can pretty much guarantee 100% spot on exposures with the M6, quickly and without having to shove a meter into the scene. Also, one less thing to carry around.

Depends on what you're doing, I suppose, but there's a reason TTL metering has caught on: it's convenient and productive. Using a separate meter breaks the flow of simply observing and photographing, especially when you're shooting in conditions in which you don't want to draw too much attention to yourself - even in people's homes, for instance.

Not all progress is simply slavish dependence on gadgetry.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), February 15, 2002.

Sorry Rob, I just can't buy it! Take your style of photography recently so well illustrated in your portfolio on this forum. My favourite style too, imagine the familiar scenario - mooching about the city or whatever looking for 'decisive moments' - I have the meter 'hidden' in my hand, point it at the area of interest, take and transfer a reading - all easy to do while acting perfectly innocently and unseen - then wait for the moment and click! If you have to look through the M, adjust the reading etc then surely you are rather 'obvious'?

Do you meter each shot? - surely you take one reading off a mid-tone and leave it alone unless needs must?

Much quicker for my way of working, but then we are all different in the way we work - the M6 meter works for you, it doesn't for me (and maybe others).

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 15, 2002.

Hey Giles--

If you hate the flashing diodes in the M6, you can always remove the battery!

-- Douglas Kinnear (douglas.kinnear@colostate.edu), February 15, 2002.

I have a M4-P and I use of for shooting slide film, with a clip-on non-TTL Voigtlander VC Meter (used to meter with a Sekonic handheld meter--it's less easily fooled in difficult lighting situations, but found it too slow to use). Exposure is spot-on as long as I'm aware of the limitations of using such a metering method (I have over 90% success rate for most rolls, which translate to only one or two wrongly exposed shots per roll). The main problem with this camera is not the lack of a built-in meter, but the inconvenience of having to use an external uncoupled meter--it slows you down by making you think about what you're doing before you shoot (which is not a bad thing, come to think of it!). I won't recommend the M4-P as a camera for, say, wedding (based on actual experience--my backup CLE with TTL exposure and flash metering turned out to be far easier for the job!). A Classic or TTL M6 is perhaps a more convenient camera, but for some inexplicable reason, I prefer the M4-P. I'd suggest that you get one now before it becomes an expensive collectible, which it surely will.

-- Hoyin Lee (leehoyin@hutchcity.com), February 15, 2002.

Slide/transparency film has been my primary camera fodder for the whole of my 30-plus-years career. I use built-in meters occasionally, but for the most part use an incident meter. I can flick that Autometer IV-F out, take a reading, and be shooting while most TTL people are still holding their cameras up to their faces and twiddling dials.

On the other hand, I don't use the Leica M very much for color slides because I bracket extensively (the correct exposure is seldom the best exposure), and for me it's very slow and awkward to bracket with the M.

-- Dave Jenkins (djphoto@vol.com), February 15, 2002.

No Giles no Giles no Giles no. I'm in denial on this one.

See you in the forest Sunday 8.30 sharp.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), February 15, 2002.

Douglas - "If you hate the flashing diodes in the M6, you can always remove the battery!"

Yes, good point but the thought of those horrible, dead electronics floating about inside would play on my mind - ugh!

Seriously, look at some of those 'street' shots in the 'how brave...' thread - now that style of photography for me (ie reportage, documentary) is the M's raison d'etre - you certainly don't 'ttl meter' every shot like that before you grab it!

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 15, 2002.

Rob, forget the forest I'm off to Heathrow, I'll be in Italy by midnight!

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 15, 2002.

I use an M4-P and love it. A handheld meter is worth having anyway, so don't think of it as an added cost. It can also be a very fast way to meter, too. I use b+w film and do a lot of street/documentary stuff; generally, i meter for light in open areas and in shaded areas (philly has a lot of narrow streets) and preset the exposure. Then i use my intuition to adjust accordingly if needed.

The handheld by incident reading is also my preferred method for portraits, and use it regardless of whether my camera has a meter or not.

700's is a great deal for the m4P; purchase it soon b4 someone else does!

-jeremyT

lifeinblue.com

-- jeremyT (jerthomas@earthlink.net), February 15, 2002.

Well I do hope that Giles and Rob work out there differences without loss of life. :-) One point I would liker to add is that if you buy an old M6, you should also factor in the price of a CLA. You may get away without doing it but at least do not get taken by surprise. As I have recently posted, not all CLAs are equal. If you buy a camera that has been CLAed, make sure it was by one of the good leica techs.

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), February 15, 2002.

My first Leica was an M4-P and I loved and hated it. The hate resulted in from being an SLR user before. After a while I shifted my habit towards throwing away all the SLR behaviour. I used a hand held meter and was slower but my pictures became (technically) better, more thinking involved.

The M4-P also eased my way towards the M6. I'll never forget the lessen it tought me.

Bernd

-- Bernd Kunze (bkunze@gmx.net), February 15, 2002.

Something broke... Here I send again...

My first Leica was an M4-P and I loved and hated it. The hate resulted in from being an SLR user before. After a while I shifted my habit towards throwing away all the SLR behaviour. I used a hand held meter and was slower but my pictures became (technically) better, more thinking involved.

The M4-P also eased my way towards the M6. I'll never forget the lesson it tought me.

Bernd

-- Bernd Kunze (bkunze@gmx.net), February 15, 2002.

Just one more... Check that the viewfinder is brilliant. I was offered a couple of shrink wrapped M4's where the viewfinder was blind. It may be that the shrink wrap is responsible for that.

--Bernd

-- Bernd Kunze (bkunze@gmx.net), February 15, 2002.

The M4-P is a good tool for me. I've never asked for the options/improvements offered by M6 or M6TTL, I don't need them for my type of shooting.

The scratch marks on eye glasses is non existent unless you choose to have plastic lenses in your frame. I bought my glasses in 1962 (the frame), a sturdy frame. Not that flimsy light weight stuff that's fashionable today- my frame is perfect for glass lenses. Plastic scratches despite hard coating, no matter how careful you are.

Hard to believe that Leica M users would have plastic eye glasses.

-- Hans Berkhout (berkhout@cadvision.com), February 15, 2002.

You guys use meters???

-- Dave Doyle (soilsouth@cox.net), February 16, 2002.

"Rob, forget the forest I'm off to Heathrow, I'll be in Italy by midnight!"

Ehmm, Giles, ahem... I just remembered I have to see my Aunt Dorothy in Kansas on errrr... urgent family business .

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), February 16, 2002.

You guys use film???!!!

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), February 16, 2002.

Plastic eyeglass lenses? Hell yes! Much safer than glass. I'm protecting these eyes of mine because blind men don't make good photographs.

I'm not sure that opticians even offer glass glasses anymore.

-- Luke Dunlap (luked@mail.utexas.edu), February 16, 2002.

There're two solutions to the M4-P's scratchy metal eyepiece:

1. Have your eyeglasses made with scratch resistant plastic lenses made by . . . Nikon!

2. Change the M4-P's metal eyepiece to the M6's rubber-padded one.

Solution #2 is cheaper!

-- Hoyin Lee (leehoyin@hutchcity.com), February 16, 2002.

Meters, I don't need no stinkin' meters....

-- Dave Doyle (soilsouth@cox.net), February 16, 2002.

Glasses? who needs glasses?!?

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 16, 2002.

Patrick- I use the M4-P, and thoroughly enjoy it. I use a Gossen handheld meter and get accurately metered shots. Having never used the TTL metering, I could not say if I'd like that better. I do not think you are handicapped without it, but a news photog might disagree. What the M6 TTL has that I wish the M4-P had, is the dedicated TTL flash. A friend uses a cheap P&S camera and gets better pictures than my M4-P in cases where fill-in flash is needed. His camera has a built-in flash that knows just how much fill-in is necessary in any given lighting situation. A concern I have with these all-mechanical cameras is that parts for them could become difficult to obtain if the change is made to electronic. Then too, repair persons could become hard to find and expensive for the all mechanical cameras. I used to have an all- mechanical Elgin watch, a masterpiece of craftsmanship. Don't know if anyone still repairs them these days, but my electronic Sharp watch puts the old mechanical watch to shame for how good it keeps time and how little it costs. Let's hope Leica's drift towards electronics will be just as auspicious as the changes in timepieces.

-- Frank Horn (owlhoot45@hotmail.com), February 17, 2002.

The M4P is a wonderful camera, I use one regularly. I use the Leicameter MR4, which couples to the shutter speed dial and gives very accurate readings. The CV clip on meter does NOT couple to the shutter speed dial but costs just about as much as a used Leicameter (125-150). Do NOT buy the Cosina meter (Nicht, Nyet, No, Non).

I personally think the M4P is a great choice, especially with the clip-on Leicameter. I have lived fine for many years w/o TTL metering, and based on the expertise I have developed and the competency of the meter, probably get better exposures than most people with SLRs, TTL, autoexposure, and matrix metering.

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), February 17, 2002.

Well, with a clip on meter I suppose there's little difference between the M4 and the M6, except the meter coverage doesn't change with the lens. I suppose wideangles are out, though.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), February 17, 2002.

I have an M4-P and an M4-2. The only difference between them is 1 red dot and 2 framelines (28/75). I love them both. They are noticeably (not substantially) lighter and more compact than the M6 TTL, and have quieter winding (but slightly louder shutters) in my experience - both probably due to 20 years of use. One other big (to me) difference - the 28/35 frame lines in the M6 have gaps at the bottom for the structure that holds the meter LEDs - in the M4-P the lines are solid, which I much, MUCH prefer.

I use a compact Sekonic L-318 hand meter - which can read either reflected or incident light. I use the hot shoe for flash and a 21 finder, and I prefer not to fill it with a meter. I struggled with metering for several months but eventually it came back to me (having started 25 years ago with a meterless Nikon F).

FWIW in the TTL vs. separate metering debate - I've had people who paid no attention to the camera stare at me when I pointed my tiny meter at them - they must think it's an anthrax detector or digital camera or something.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), February 17, 2002.

M4-P was my first, and is now my only choice for leica. I recently bought a ttl in ignorant lust for an internal light meter. I was not impressed, and through the years of meter holding realized the ttl was not for me. The M4-P is an M6 w/o the meter and a better, brighter viewfinder, save your money, get the M4-P. Most of the models have a brass top that you could get repainted if you drool for that black paint look, bottoms, shoes, levels are black chrome though.

-- Andrew Meissner (meissner@predawnraid.com), February 20, 2002.