Leica M6: Impressions thus far
This post has been put together over a number days, perhaps weeks. I have no idea when I will post it. It will sit in reserve for a while, I suppose.
A number of you are interested in my impressions of the Leica M6 that I recently purchased and I am interested in the ‘mystique’. First, how the heck did I even get here? A Leica? I must admit that I was influenced by Mike Johnston’s article about spending a year with a Leica and a single lens. I became intrigued. First, I went and purchased a film camera, a Mamiya 645e, shot that for 3 months continuously, then looked in my bag, saw a lot of stuff that I was not using that I could use to finance my Leica purchase, then just did it. Now I have it and I need to use it.
I’ve always admired simplicity in design, which was why I was so comfortable with manual cameras. Simple devices. With the Leica, it’s back to the ultimate in simplicity. It’s nice to know that I have a camera where even if the batteries were to die, I could keep on shooting. Pure mechanics involved here. Truth be told, I could do the same thing with a Olympus 35 LC/RC rangefinder, which I happen to have. But, I really just wanted to know what all the hubbub was about!
2009/09/08:
I have used the camera a couple of times: Once, in downtown Charleston; The other time when I was at home this past weekend. I like the heft and the feel of it. One of my friends, upon holding the camera, remarked: “It’s got some ass to it! It doesn’t feel cheap.” Translation, it’s fairly heavy for such a small camera. It feels solid. 
That was my initial impression, too. Although expensive, it didn’t feel like I had to treat it kindly like it was some sensitive, high maintenance prima dona. Nope. This certainly feels like a workhorse, definitely blue collar.
The controls are very few. There is an aperture adjustment, shutter speed, and ISO. That’s about it. However, what more does one need?
The viewfinder is very crisp and bright, save for the times when I accidentally place my thumb on the rangefinder window and leave a smudge, but a simple wiping off of the viewfinder with a part of my shirt brings the brightness right back.
The only issue that I have with the viewfinder is that while using the lens shade for the 50mm lens, the lens shade gets in the way and cuts off the lower right corner of the viewfinder. This is a bit annoying. Now, I understand why pancake lenses would be useful. They’d stay out the way of the viewfinder. This would be especially useful for shorter focal lens that have such wide angles of view.
Film loading:
Many have heard the legend of how strange it is to load a Lecia. Well, it is strange, that is until you read the manual and understand how it works, then it is quite easy to do. Simply slip the film in, guide it into the take up spool, make sure that it is engaged in the sockets. Close the back, put the bottom back on and it never fails. My first load took about 3 minutes. The second about 1 minute. The third just a few seconds. What’s the difference? I found an online manual and read the instructions. Presto-Changeo-Alakazaam! Easy!
Focusing:
I’m getting better at focusing. Rangefinder focusing is a little different, but accurate … I find that zone, or hyperfocal, focusing is the way to go. It allows one to simply frame and shoot. What could be easier? At first, I was rather against it, that is, until I tried it. I’m not doing any sneaky shooting from the hip. I’ll put my camera to my face, frame, and shoot. It all happens in just a few seconds. This kind of shooting is interesting in that lots of times, you’ll be surprised at what you captured in the background. There’s not a whole lot of time futzing around trying to get the elements just right. The moment could be gone before you know it.
DOF:
This, I think, is the most difficult part to get used to. I’m used to looking through the lens and seeing what my DOF looks like. I rarely use a DOF preview, knowing somewhat intuitively what my DOF will look like at about the first 3 f/stops of my lens; I’m not there yet with the Leica. Looking through the viewfinder, everything is so bright, clear, crisp, and in focus. Nothing is out of focus, so there is no starting point to imagine DOF. You just have to ‘feel’ it. It will take a number of rolls of film and a lot of paying attention for me to figure it out.
2009/09/21:
Exposure meter:
So far, I’ve shot about 5 rolls of film. I’m not shooting just to be shooting. I’m taking my time with this. I’ve finally gotten used to how the shutter speed dial vs the exposure arrows work. If the left arrow is on, then you need to turn the shutter speed dial to right to get the other arrow to come on. Of course, the opposite is true: Right arrow on, turn left to make the left arrow come on.
Funny, there’s not a whole lot to say about this camera. It’s very simple in it’s design. My only problem that I’ve had with it is that it seems just a tad small for my hands, but it does feel good. As mentioned earlier, I tend to smudge the rangefinder window with my thumb. This only happens when I’m focusing. If using the hyperfocal method, it’s not an issue.
I’m curious to see how it compares to the Olympus 35 LC, whenever I get it back from its cleaning.
I’ve been curious about what you’d think, and this post just whets my appetite for more. I’m curious whether the combination of zone focus and ease of use changes the way you think about what you try and capture. Excellent images, certainly. Do you notice anything about the quality of the images that reflect the fact you’re using Leica glass?
[Reply]
@Chris: I think that using zone focusing tends to lead more toward more ‘decisive moment’ or spontaneous shots. When I have time to focus, I take the time. I actually prefer it that way. As for the Leica glass, all that I can say right now is that when I see my negatives, I never have to apply any amount of sharpening to them. With digital, I always had to apply a small amount of sharpening to get them to look sharp.
I’m not sure how this will compare with the other rangefinder that I have. Certainly, right out of the ‘box’ it is sharper than my Mamiya at any aperture. I’m sure that that has to do with the quality of the glass. Allegedly, the glass on the Olympus is said to be ‘tack sharp’. We shall see!
[Reply]
Well, you use a 50/2.0 and even that is very fast, but part of the legendary appeal of Leicas is, that there are lenses like a 21/1.4 or a 50/1.0. Sure, they cost a fortune, but you get what you can’t get for any SLR, and these lenses are even small. On the other hand, usin them at hyperfocal distance means using them at around f8. Pure waste, if you ask me. I wonder how you’ll like it when you begin to experiment with shallow DOF. But maybe you won’t. Maybe you’ll reserve your D300 for that?
[Reply]
Andreas: I’ve shot a number of images that have shallow DOF and really like the results. What is a bit difficult is imagining what it will look like ahead of time. With the SLR I can see what it will look like at a wide open aperture, or a couple of stops down. Now, I’ll just have to get a feel for how it will look.
[Reply]
Paul, I’m going to toss my two cents into the ring and hope it doesn’t get tossed back at me.
While recent photos taken with the M6 have been excellent, I’ve personally found there’s something I liked better about the earlier Mamiya 645e photos. They had a different feel and I can’t put my finger on the exact reason why they seem “better” to me–it may be a matter of personal taste. I’d be interested to see if anyone else agrees or disagrees.
[Reply]
@Earl: Very interesting. I’d like to hear more. Perhaps it has to do with subject selection? Grain? Focus fall-off? Format? Just last night I was looking at some of the 645e shots and, of course, they have much lower grain. Perhaps that’s not quite accurate: They have the same amount of grain, but they require a smaller amount of magnification. Anyway, I’m guessing. If you can put your finger on it, I’d be interested to hear about it. As a matter of fact, I still have one roll that sits undeveloped. I think that I’ll put that in the soup tonight.
The medium format cameras certainly have a nicer, much sooner, focus fall-off.
[Reply]
@Paul: It’s not subject selection. I’ve only seen the photos you’ve posted here so my opinion on this might change if i saw them printed or larger screen versions. It may have something to do with grain and perceived stronger mid-tones–perhaps film related. Just thought I’d mention it!
[Reply]
@Earl: I’m using the same film type, FP4+, and developer, Rodinal, for both types. Now you have me curious.
[Reply]
@Paul: I don’t know, like I said it may just be me. You have to make allowances for us digital guys.
[Reply]
I am having a good time sitting out here in the bleachers watching and listening. It’s a bit like watching a game for which I don’t know all the rules and its “lingo”. But, I’m enjoying it nontheless. While I don’t have anything to contribute—being one of those “digital guys” Earl mentions, I just wanted to say that I am enjoying the conversation.
[Reply]
Thanks for your comments on the Leica M6. As a long term M6 user I tried a Canon Digital SLR for a month and was impressed by the immediacy and versatility but freaked at the complexity. The gadgetry took over from the simplicity of the image. I returned to the M6.
[Reply]