Looking at a photo of new M7, I can see the same 12mm white disk area to measure light, does any ony oe of you would have liked it better a full format patern, like any regular SLR; I personaly find it more suitable for auto exposure photography, do you?

Having an automatic camera to measure ligth selectively is pretty much the same as the regular M6, I mean you still have to select the area to measure ligth and press the shutter a bit to keep it up and then make the shoot, if you want to take a second shoot then you have to do it again, I would prefer a all format read, 60-40 as nikon or what ever, but not spot in auto. what do you think users?

And Merry Christmas to all!

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), February 25, 2002

Answers

Problem is I didn't read anything about an AE lock. Without this your subject would always have to be dead center and a mid-tone value. Try metering off a black/ brown/ blue/ sweater and AE or no AE you ain't gonna get the shot. Users can save themselves $2400 and go buy a book on Ansel Adams' Zone system. Learn to meter off a midtone in the scene then adjust for what you want out of your exposure. Its just as fast (if not faster) than letting the camera do it for you and you don't have to fiddle with the exposure compensation dial ethier (since its all contained in the shutter speed dial on any camera).

Hey, but if bally-hootin' will help Leica stay in business then more power to them!

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), February 25, 2002.

Whoops, I meant to say exp comp can be accomplished in half stops on most M lenses.

Peace.

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), February 25, 2002.

Roberto has a point. If you think of a Leica as the right camera for capturing spontaneous moments, like street photography, then if the camera is automated, it ought to do all the exposure work. So from that POV you need a Leica with 60/40 metering, if not multi-pattern metering.

If you take postcards, like I do, then you don't need an M7 in the first place.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), February 25, 2002.

i think it does AE lock by holding the shutter button halfway.

-- Tristan (tt@tristan.net), February 25, 2002.

Ahem, it's a 12.1mm diameter metering spot, not 12. For goodness sakes, this a a Leica, let's be precise!

;-)

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), February 25, 2002.

John:

It is AE-lock only if I read the review by Erwin correctly. So, as Tristan points out, you lock the exposure as soon as it's measured with the half-press on the shutter, and must release shutter pressure to re-lock a different exposure.

Personally I think this is a more useful feature than always-on AE, especially fitting into the Leica philosophy -- ie; many of us already meter off of a neutral-toned subject with our M6's, and use that reading to set our meter. Now, the M7 will set that reading for us, once we've shown it what to lock on to.

Which brings me to Roberto's question. I for one am glad they left the metering pattern the same as the M6, as I find it more accurate than true 80/20 center-weighting when used as described above. It's not unduly influenced by extraneous light in the outer portion of the image, rather only what I point it at. Actually, I would have preferred an even tighter spot-metering pattern. Also with it being the same size, there is something to be said for consistency between bodies -- and thus it should be a no-brainer to jump between an M6TTL and the new M7.

:-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 25, 2002.

As I mentioned in a paralell thread, AE lock is pretty much de riguer with a spot metering pattern. I can't see how using the AE with the 12.1mm spot is going to result in good, consistent exposures if you do not have, for you will then be metering off whatever is in the center of the field, regardless of tone.

AE lock does have a HUGE advantage over manual metering ergonomically though, especially if it is at your fingertip. A little press of the button with your fingertip is equivalent to fiddling with the aperture ring and shutter speed dial. But if the lock is for one shot only (as opposed to lock until cancelled), you will have to re-read and lock for every shot. Needless to say, this is ergonomically inferior to the set-exposure-once-for-a-given-scene manual metering of the M6.

Well, I guess we'll find out as the user reports roll in in the months to come.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), February 25, 2002.

The M7: elelctronic shutter and automatic exposure -- welcome to the sixties, or is it the seventies?

-- Mitch Alland/Bangkok (malland@mac.com), February 25, 2002.

It is AE-lock only if I read the review by Erwin correctly. So, as Tristan points out, you lock the exposure as soon as it's measured with the half-press on the shutter, and must release shutter pressure to re-lock a different exposure.

Jack, I'm not an engineer but I can already think of a better way to execute this with their existing modifications. Why not have an AE lock lever setting on the On/Off switch (3 positions). You meter the proper tonal value, flip the switch, and the value is locked. Now, the LED display switchs from shutter speeds to exp comp. and you can fiddle around with exp comp without having to glance down at the wheel on the film plate cover. To me this would've epitomized the ergonomics of this new variant.

But what do I know... after all, I'm not Ralph Gibson!

;-)

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), February 25, 2002.

R Watson,

Yes, I agree with you that full-frame centre-weighted average metering is an important feature with AE that is lacking in the M7. I believe this should have been an option in addition to selective metering. I realise, of course, that providing such an option would have entailed design changes to the shutter curtain metering patrtern and, possibly, the photocells.

In order to offer a spontaneous, more relaxed and care-free mode of operating, in which one can forget about selecting the shutter speed, the exposure metering must be reliable under "average" circumstances. The +/- 2ev exposure compensation dial on the back of the M7, for use under non-average circumstances such as a snow scene, would be better suited to full-field average metering.

As you and others have pointed out, with selective metering there needs to be something of "average grey" tone in the selective spot or else you have to keep setting the exposure by pointing at such an object and then locking the exposure every time you shoot. This is hardly inducive to a care-free style of photography. I suspect there will be many users of the M7 in AE mode who will be disappointed with their results because of this.

-- Ray Moth (ray_moth@yahoo.com), February 26, 2002.

I agree that a separate AE lock would have been a good idea.

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), February 26, 2002.

This is a really important point considering the metering pattern and something I for one had not appreciated in the AE M7.

What can Leica do? Certainly they could have a larger spot or completely grey (off-white) curtain like the Bessa's together with a wider angle reading receptor.

But to combine this with a switchable (spot) reading must entail some sort of 'moving' receptor and we all know what happened with 'moving' arms - ie the CL etc.

Perhaps the receptor should be changed for some sort of CCD with a variable area reading.

I shall remaim with my M4-P and incident meter!

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 26, 2002.

I belive it shall be easy to have both types of measurements, selected by a level, courtains will need a larger white spot, but I think it is still posible without much of a deal, in terms of design, and a lot to add to this new auto-M, for me it is not much of a diference the actual M7 to the M6TTL, you still have to select your area to measure and lock exposure, and then if you want an extra shoot you must do it again, M6 sounds enough for me, well no, you canīt switch ligth metter off without turning the all system off, do you?; one of the joys of a M6 is the option to switch metter off in dim ligth after you have made all measurements, other way is a ligth pain... you know what I mean donīt you?

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), February 26, 2002.

How do you switch the meter off in an M6 and then use the camera. I thought the meter stays on unless the shutter is set to an off position.

-- jay goldman (goldman@math.umn.edu), February 26, 2002.

Jay.

If you want the meter off in an M6 either remove the bateries, or pay no attention to the diodes.

Be advised though the the M6 TTL function with flashes that support TTL, will not operate without batteries in the camera.

Best,

Jerry

-- Jerome R. Pfile, Jr. (JerryPfile@msn.com), February 26, 2002.

You can't switch off the meter in an M6TTL and still use the camera but, once you have set the shutter speed and aperture, you can take subsequent shots without hesitating on the shutter button, so that the light-balance LED display in the viewfinder is lit for only a tiny fraction of a second. This avoids being distracted by the display and saves considerable battery consumption.

The potentially big disadvantage of ANY camera in AE mode is that it will constantly readjust itself to the light that it "sees" in its metering area, even though the ambient light hasn't changed. This can result in exposures that are "all over the map", as Kirk Tuck has pointed out in his Leica M6 review on photo.net, e.g. if the subjects are people wearing very light or very dark clothing. With manual exposure mode, on the other hand, you can set the exposure once and forget it - until the ambient light changes, that is.

-- Ray Moth (ray_moth@yahoo.com), February 26, 2002.

With multi-frame AE lock you can do the same. Too bad the M7 does not have this potentially useful feature, only a single-frame AE lock.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), February 27, 2002.

All of you gentlemen will need to excuse my ignorance. But, I read all your comments with great interest. However, they still don't andwer for me the basic question. Is the M7 better? Is it worth the change from an M6TTL. One problem the M5 had (to which the M7 keeps being reffered to ) was the amount of plastic pieces utilized in it's construction, this was corrected with the M6TTL - something that has helped in its' lack of problems. The M7, with all it's electronic new stuff may prove to be a problem and users may be happy they never purchased one - but remained faithful to the M6. It seems to me - an again it may be a very ignorant opinion, that since the M3 nothing quite satisfied users as an M4 and then the M6TTL. What do you think?

-- John Ramos (tepito@pacbell.net), February 28, 2002.

John; as far as I have read here, and sixteen years of experience with M3, M4P and M6 classic lately, all M's are great photographic instruments, wich need to be properly adjusted and lub as well as rigthly used.

M's are basicaly mecanical, reliable, durable and basic photographic instruments, and had been since almost fifthy years.

Now, with the last two models (M6TTL and M7) Leica has turned M cameras into newer tecnologic but remained in the same body, for me this cameras has been so good tools that I wouldn't ask for any thing else, even ligth meter in the M6 seems not necesary some times, now flash TTL with a limited 1/50 synch is not the way to do it, and automatic (aperture priority) in spot mode (12mm) as in the new M7, is also for me not the way to make this cameras better.

Leica is not just tring to make a more market competitive camera, Leica also is changing the way Leica M photography IS.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), February 28, 2002.

Dear Watson,

Thank you for your response to my question. I have been chasing the Leica M for about 14 years and taking the $3,500.00 and change jump - (after you buy the lense)is something that I'm finally ready to do, I was all set to buy the M6TTL and got wind of the M7 realese, it was for me unexpected news. There are things that I'm attracted to in the M7 - like the so called "anti-reflection coating", But I agree, it doesn't make the camera or the photographer better.

-- John Ramos (tepito@pacbell.net), March 01, 2002.