I agree with others that a larger format makes more sense. Medium format film cameras can be relatively cheap and provide a look that’s not always easy to match with digital. And personally I don’t think film Leicas are worth the money.
ottokbre wrote:
Here is the math for me. Processing at lab but no scan or print:
Kodak Portra or Cinestill + processing is about $27 / 36 exposures = .75 a shot
Kodak/Fuji Gold/Color Plus + processing is about $20 / 36 exposures = .55 a shot
The math for film photography is a bit grim, though, because you're paying for all the shots spoiled by light leaks, missed exposure, etc. as well as the good ones. I've spent a grand total of $1,023.27 so far this year on film, developing, and scanning, and only 67 of my photos so far were ones I considered good enough to post on my Flickr account. So each of my keepers cost effectively $15.28.
This is a good case for scanning your own photos because then you don't pay to have the bad ones scanned.
My keeper rate isn’t any worse than digital because I take more care with film anyways. The flip side is that you might not take risks on photos that you would on digital.
Black and white film I tend to shoot more freely. My film costs are much lower, closer to .15-.20.
If you just want to scratch a film itch and see if it turns into a raging film rash, I wouldn't start with a Leica M, unless you can find a cheap, reliable one. Which I doubt, these days.
As another said, try a Nikon N80 or N100 for autofocus. Or an Nikon FM or FE for manual experience.
The FM2N, FM3s cost quite a bit more nowadays.
The world is awash in good, inexpensive Nikon film-era lenses, some of which feel solid and old school like quality rangefinder lens. Plus, they are relatively simple, small bodies.
The way I do it is buy it in bulk, eg 20+ rolls at a time whenever it comes in stock at mpex.com who tend to easily have the best prices. And think of that cost as a one time deal, like a nice dinner or two. Or even a weekend watching sports at a bar..
Then I justify it as, well I bought the film instead of going out and think of it as a one time cost. I mean, when you go out to dinner you don’t calculate the price of your meal per bite, do you?
So a one time purchase, then I consider all that film I’m using as ‘free’ and just use it..
theHUN wrote:
... and if medium/large format is a bridge too far, consider the XPan. Helimat has done (is doing) a phenomenal series with it starting here.
I would advise caution here. If the XPan needs repair, it will often be a lost case. It is quite pricey these day too with lenses - and you need to get a really well maintained one to be happy for a long time with this model.
retrofocus wrote:
I would advise caution here. If the XPan needs repair, it will often be a lost case. It is quite pricey these day too with lenses - and you need to get a really well maintained one to be happy for a long time with this model.
I did not know that, so thank you for pointing that out.
Can the M7’s board still be replaced? I thought it and the M6 TTL both suffered from that long term consideration.
Regardless, I’d go with an MP. Not sure if black chrome versions are easy to come by these days, but they do exist if that’s your preference. The film advance is nicer than the stock M7’s double jointed version, but film rewind is a bit slower. Its meter readout will be the same as your M10, as opposed to the M6 classic’s (not sure about the reissue) no center dot (nbd either way). All MPs have the rangefinder’s condenser rightfully in place. Early M7’s may not. I forget how much DAG, et. al. charge for that.
d.s. wrote:
Can the M7’s board still be replaced? I thought it and the M6 TTL both suffered from that long term consideration.
Regardless, I’d go with an MP. Not sure if black chrome versions are easy to come by these days, but they do exist if that’s your preference. The film advance is nicer than the stock M7’s double jointed version, but film rewind is a bit slower. Its meter readout will be the same as your M10, as opposed to the M6 classic’s (not sure about the reissue) no center dot (nbd either way). All MPs have the rangefinder’s condenser rightfully in place. Early M7’s may not. I forget how much DAG, et. al. charge for that.
That’s about all I can think of. Hope it helps....Show more →
The M7 is newer than the M6TTL, some are much newer depending on build.
The ones to get are those in the 3XXX or higher serial # range. Those have the MP condensers, and the latest electronics.
I replaced the broken knuckle film advance lever on both my M7s with the solid MP style lever. DAG carries them. I much prefer it.
I also have the MP - sweet camera - but mine is black paint. I didn't know there was a black chrome version. But the reason I recommend the M7 is that is the most similar to the OP's M10, so the experience would be seamless.
Desmolicious wrote:
The M7 is newer than the M6TTL, some are much newer depending on build.
The ones to get are those in the 3XXX or higher serial # range. Those have the MP condensers, and the latest electronics.
I replaced the broken knuckle film advance lever on both my M7s with the solid MP style lever. DAG carries them. I much prefer it.
I also have the MP - sweet camera - but mine is black paint. I didn't know there was a black chrome version. But the reason I recommend the M7 is that is the most similar to the OP's M10, so the experience would be seamless....Show more →
BC’s were available via the a la carte program they had. Used they’re likely had at a premium.
Not arguing, but I haven’t found aperture priority to be that much quicker than manual with negative film (it’s certainly more forgiving than the m10 and slide film assuming you’re exposing for the highlights). Different strokes..
Desmolicious wrote:
I also have the MP - sweet camera - but mine is black paint. I didn't know there was a black chrome version. But the reason I recommend the M7 is that is the most similar to the OP's M10, so the experience would be seamless.
Thanks. I've been researching a little bit and looks wise at least, I like the black paint MP the most. Looks like the main difference in usage between the MP and the m7 is the auto exposure?
Regarding other brand bodies, I'm sure I could get a film camera for way less! But I'd like to use the M lenses I already have. I have some nice ones that I want to use.
Desmolicious wrote:
The way I do it is buy it in bulk, eg 20+ rolls at a time whenever it comes in stock at mpx.com who tend to easily have the best prices.
A little late to this party but I am just ahead of the OP in this film journey. I found a mint Leica M4-P to go along with my M11. I also have a couple of other cams from my past like the Canonet QL17 GIII which I resurrected. And a medium format Minolta TLR.
Once I got used to the process of operating each of these cameras, my images improved. I'm using a local lab to process and my costs are pretty much in line with the OP. I am planning to develop my own B&W and perhaps color C-41 as well. For developing, I will be using a Lab Box. It seems that some love the Lab Box and some don't but I'm willing to give it a try and avoid the fumbling with a changing bag. For scanning, I plan to use my Sony A1 with macro lens and the Valoi Easy 35 (when it arrives). It's beeen a fun journey and I'm really happy with the results. There's something very satisfying about clicking the shutter and then advancing the film.
theHUN wrote:
... and if medium/large format is a bridge too far, consider the XPan. Helimat has done (is doing) a phenomenal series with it starting here.
I for one, appreciated your post & won't sh!t all over it!
The others are right however, the Xpan is a risky proposition due to the high cost, (although I don't think the OP is counting his pennies) and repairability. I was lucky to get a good clean kit, and then to be sure I had it serviced by Bob Watkins at Precision Camera Works. Despite the slow turnaround it's reassuring that it's been CLA'd by one of the only Xpan specialists out there.
Long story short, I don't regret anything! The kit I bought has nearly doubled in value since I bought it, and has worked great for me for nearly 4 years now. I dabble with selling it to parlay into something else, but then I use it and forget that whole idea.
For the OP; If you want Leica M, a light meter, and repairability is a concern, your best bet would be the MP IMO as they are recent, and can still even be had brand new. The Reissue M6 has had some QC issues, and the M-A is meterless.
lifeandmylens wrote:
Thanks. I've been researching a little bit and looks wise at least, I like the black paint MP the most. Looks like the main difference in usage between the MP and the m7 is the auto exposure?
Regarding other brand bodies, I'm sure I could get a film camera for way less! But I'd like to use the M lenses I already have. I have some nice ones that I want to use.
A pre-owned, but pristine MP Black Paint, that I saw in a glass display case at Houston Camera Exchange, in Texas, was the first M camera that I handled. It planted a seed, that took some years to sprout into adding the Leica M system, starting with an M10. So, I am biased toward acquiring a duplicate of that MP.
If one pays a reasonable price for a pre-owned film M camera, and uses it without causing noticeable wear and tear, it should be possible to recover the cost, upon resale, if it comes to that.
As stated in a previous reply post, it is not necessary to have a full darkroom to develop 35mm black & white film negatives, so, one can get a feel whether film is fun, inside and outside the camera, without a major construction project. Having developed film, in a grade school journalism class, in the mid-Seventies, I am reasonably sure that I would find it fun, again. (I already use an M 246 Monochrom, so, there is no doubt about liking Black & White photography.)
lifeandmylens wrote:
Thanks. I've been researching a little bit and looks wise at least, I like the black paint MP the most. Looks like the main difference in usage between the MP and the m7 is the auto exposure?
Regarding other brand bodies, I'm sure I could get a film camera for way less! But I'd like to use the M lenses I already have. I have some nice ones that I want to use.
That website doesn't seem like they sell film?
Sorry the website is mpex.com
Yeah basically the M7 is like a Nikon FE, the MP is like a Nikon FM.
For the OP; If you want Leica M, a light meter, and repairability is a concern, your best bet would be the MP IMO as they are recent, and can still even be had brand new. The Reissue M6 has had some QC issues, and the M-A is meterless.
Current MPs are experiencing the same film scratching issues as the M6. Not surprising really.
