Leica Battle – M4 vs M7
I’m a fan of Leica rangefinders. I have been since I bought my M4 back on the last day of 2007 as a gift to myself for completing 365 Portraits. At the time, I bought the M4 because it was the last of the really handcrafted German Leicas that was all manual (and not the slighted M5). That, plus the fact that it was as much as I could afford with good conscience. I wanted it to be slow, and deliberate, and mechanized.
In hindsight, I really should have bought an M6 — that way I’d at least get a built-in meter so I wouldn’t have to carry one around wherever I went as well. But regrets should be left in the past and I’m very happy with my M4. It’s not just a great camera (and I spent 30 minutes clicking and re-cocking the shutters of several before I decided on mine); it’s also an instrument to measure specific amounts of light.
Fast forward to this past weekend when I was visiting some family out in New Jersey and was offered the host’s M7 to borrow. I was a little apprehensive about borrowing such a lovely and valuable piece of kit, but I’m certainly able to take care of nice things and wanted to try out the last evolution of a film Leica.
Direct comparisons of the photographic results are both impossible and meaningless. The older camera has an early collapsible Summicron mounted on it, which is I’m sure inferior to the brand new model. I will say that the pictures I took on the M7 came out technically as great as they should for a tool at this level. Instead, most of what I’m going to talk about is handling and the differences in feature set that are interesting.
What does the M7 do that the M4 does not? Well, a couple things that matter to me. It has a meter (which requires batteries that I needed to replace) and an aperture priority automatic exposure mode — GASP! That’s right — it took until 2002 for them to add any sort of automatic exposure modes to the M. Basically, you put the shutter speed wheel to AUTO and it’ll take care of the rest based upon the aperture you set on the lens barrel. Because of the Av mode, they also added the ability for the camera to read the film speed using the DX standard. As an aside, I didn’t notice that you need to set the wheel on the back of the camera to DX to get that to happen. I was shooting 400 speed film the other day, but accidentally had it set to 200 for most of the afternoon. Therefore, my film was about a stop overexposed, but that’s OK because b/w film, even the C41 variety does that pretty gracefully. You can also use this wheel to dial in an exposure compensation for the Av mode. Finally, there is now a power switch/lock around the shutter button that you have to remember or else you’ll chew through the battery.
See? You add one little AUTO mode and the number of things you’ve got to worry about goes from 2 to 9, and this is where my slight frustration with the M7 lies. Sure, I could use it in all-manual mode and carry a handheld meter, but at that point I might as well use the M4. Also, shutter speeds other than 1/60th and 1/125th are unavailable if your batteries die because the shutter is now electronically controlled. More accurate than gears, I’m sure, but kind of missing the point of a classically mechanical camera. Ultimately, the purpose of the M7 is to be able to use the electronics, so I’m going to comment on it from that perspective. There was also a strange thing where every once in a while the shutter wouldn’t operate when it was in Av mode even though the viewfinder was popping up with a nominal shutter speed like 400th. It was probably operator error. Oh yeah, there’s also now a display in the viewfinder.
“Bill, stop complaining!” you might say, and I will. Certainly if someone brought me both of these cameras and said I could have only one, I’d choose the M7 due to its overall versatility. It’s a lovely photographic device, for sure, but for all its visual and evolutionary similarities, in some ways it’s a very different machine than the older models like my M4. I have a sentimental attachment to mine, of course, so maybe that’s it. But there’s something about the batteries that places the M7 closer in my mind to my 5D than my 4×5. It’s a decidedly modern camera in a way that even the M6 is not. Not sure what to make of that.
As a final addendum, while at the Leica store for replacement batteries, I got to spend a few minutes with the latest digital M. One word: “Yum.” $8000 of yum? No, not for me unless I win the lottery, but very nice nonetheless. I just really wish they’d kept the level for cocking the shutter instead of replacing it with a motor. Where am I supposed to put my thumb while holding it?
Digital Rangefinder Envy
Most of the time I take pictures with a Canon 5D Mark II. It’s a great little camera and I really have no true gripes about it, but there are times when taking pictures with a SLR feels one step removed from the subject. I don’t know if it’s the fact that you’re peering down a little viewfinder or maybe the mirror black-out when you actually press the shutter or maybe just the front to back depth of the camera itself. Something about it makes it feel like I’m playing a taking pictures videogame.
Taking pictures with a rangefinder is another thing entirely. There’s no mirror blackout, the cameras are smaller, and if you’re right-eyed you can even keep your left one open as well so you’re viewfinding in 3D. I’ve got a 70’s era Leica M4 which I usually only really shoot on trips nowadays (film & processing is too expensive to do it all the time), I just wish I could get the same satisfaction from digital.
Well there is the M9, which is a very nice body which at $8000 I just can’t justify for the amount of time I’d actually use it. The M8 that proceeded it was right out due to the fact that it was a cropped sensor. If I’m going to spend that kind of money on a digital Leica, it should work with my lenses just like my film one does. Another little thing that gets me about these digital Leicas is that the shutter is electronic in that it re-cocks with a motor. One of the best things about old Leica Ms is that they’re nearly silent and cocking the shutter with you thumb is part of the ritual as well as giving your thumb somewhere to hold on to while you shoot. They should have left the thumb crank in.
So into this landscape comes the new Fuji X100 that everyone is clamoring for. It certainly looks pretty sweet from the front and top (not so much from the back in my opinion), and most photographers can’t get enough of it’s retro styling. At $1000 it’s not cheap, has a fixed 35mm equivalent lens, and the reviews seem to be mixed. People want to love it, but apparently there are some flaws. Shutter lag, battery life, and good but not great image quality especially at high-iso. Come on guys, shutter lag in a camera that’s supposed to mimic some of the most responsive cameras ever made? The cameras which defined the concept of The Decisive Moment. That should have been goal Number One on the list.
Either way apparently Adorama can’t keep them in stock. Not that that means they’re selling a ton of them, maybe they aren’t making too many. But it does prove that there is a market for a small responsive rangefinder body with great sensor. Why won’t Canon or Nikon stick the 5D II sensor in a little rangefinder body with a mechanical shutter and a Leica M lens mount. People would eat that up. I’d buy two. Alas it looks like we’re stuck with either crazy expensive Leica or mediocre Fuji. Some people are loving the micro 4/3rds for this kind of use, but I prefer a viewfinder to a screen, and I know you can get hot shoe viewfinders, but still these camera feel more like a super-digicam than a digified film camera. Two different things.
Puerto Rico Scans
A couple portraits from the Leica
I had a roll of film in my Leica for a few months now. A few shots here or there and been meaning about finishing up the roll and getting it processed. So today I did that and here are a couple shots of my friends Dave and Tracie. I normally do a lot of processing to finish my photographs, so sometimes it’s nice to do things old skool.
Lindsay
From Mary super done-up on digital with studio lights, to my lovely friend Lindsay on film with sunlight. Gotta keep it interesting…
Leica Family Tree
If you haven’t seen this before, it’s pretty cool.
You can see it here bigger: http://www.overgaard.dk/thorstenovergaardcom_copyrighted_graphics/leitz_leica_family_tree_970w.jpg
Melissa at All Points West
While at the festival, I reached into my back and loaded a roll of portra 160NC film. Or at least I THOUGHT that it was 160NC. When I rewound it later that day I realized that I had grabbed a roll of T-Max 400 instead. So I had a b/w roll that I thought was color, exposed one and a half stops too hot. Oops.
Connie down at Accurate Photo near my place in Park Slope just pulled it back a stop which smoothed everything out. Good thing I did it with the b/w and not the color film. I’m not sure that would have fared as well.
Anyway, here’s a photo of my sister.
Oh, and I’ve made a revision to my main portfolio site if anyone wants to take a look. http://www.billwadman.com/
Mary Beth in Black and White
Horsepower
Black and White and Progress
Yesterday, my mother and sister and I went to the Met to see a new special photography exhibit that opened recently. It covers the years from 1840-1940 with a bit more on either side through the lens of about a dozen monster photographers. Early early Talbot prints, Atget, Evans, HCB, the heavies. As they are photographs from the older era they were universally monochrome. I’d say black and white but many of them were albumen prints that are better described as dark tan and white.
I had brought my Leica and a roll of 400CN with me which allowed me to both see this work and then get inspired to shoot as we walked around for the rest of the day. I went home, getting the film processed on the way (3 cheers for Connie), and scanned the ones. The photo in the last post is from that roll, as well as a good 6 others which I decided to scan and print. That’s a pretty good take for me from a single roll, the scanning takes a long time to do and clean up, so I’m picky when I’m editing.
The prints were looking so nice on the satin paper I use that I got on a little black and white Leica printing spree and went and printed about 20 images that I’ve shot since the beginning of the year. About 6×9″ on letter size paper. One after another as they popped out of the printer I held them under the light and got a little giddy.
Now, I’m not going to say that b/w is for everything or that you can’t shoot good b/w on a digital camera, especially with monochrome color channel adjustments in software like Lightroom. But for some reason I didn’t feel like I could have produced quite the same images with my digital camera. I’ve tried too, and some of them came out really nice, but none of them felt as objective somehow. Maybe it was the leica glass, and perhaps it was the borders I leave on the images when I scan (That’s my own little rule with the Leica, ‘No Cropping’ and borders to prove it.. I want to be like HCB).
No matter the reason, there is something ‘better’ and more interesting about the film b/w than digital to me, and I don’t feel the same way about color. The dynamic range feels wider (certainly the case with true b/w film), and the midtones have more character. If I had shot the above photo with my 5D, that skylight would have been completely blown out. And blown out in that digital way. If I have one big gripe with my digital gear, it’s the complete lack of grace when blowing out highlights. I know all about digital theory, and all 1’s means 100% and there ain’t nothin’ above 100%. But they need to expand the dynamic range of the sensors so that they can use software to give a much smoother curve to the ends of the spectrum.
Or maybe it’s the silver nitrate (thought I was shooting C41 film and printing to inkjet, it’s DNA is still in the blood) And that’s when the only analog part of my process is the film after that it’s digital all the way. It’s as if the process has been so refined over the past 100+ years that there is no way to improve it very much. Maybe I’m talking a lot of shit.
Subscribe on iTunes
Podcast RSS Feed