Re: [Leica] Leica M advice wanted

[InfinityDT@aol.com]

In a message dated 6/13/99 1:22:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
nathan.wajsman@euronet.be writes:

<< You do not need to worry about the M6 not being sufficiently "high tech" 
for
 slide film.>> 
                      Thanks for the reassurance.  I've read and heard some 
rumors that the factory-spec M's shutters were inconsistent up to 1/2 stop, 
but frankly I could never believe it considering the number of slides that 
have been shot with M's over the past 40 years (and with LTM's before that).  
I just realized that I'd never personally used reversal film in a Leica and 
kind of panicked.

<<Of course, you must be aware of what you are metering and use the meter
 intelligently. >>
              That's not a problem.  I understand subject tonality and the 
film's latitude, plus there's always the option of taking a reading through a 
90 or 135 lens if the meter covers too much of a contrast range with a wider 
lens.  I find the M6's meter next-best after a true spotmeter in terms of 
usefulness with slide film.  The one thing I dislike about my Nikon FM2n's is 
the 60/40 metering pattern--just too broad.  I always feel compelled to carry 
my Sekonic L-408 as well, which adds to the bulk.
 
 <<As for film choice, I think that Velvia and Kodachrome 25 may be too slow 
to be
 relied on exclusively. I do not know exactly where in Europe you are going, 
but
 if you are in Northern Europe>> 

          I'll be in Paris for a couple days, then on to Budapest, Vienna and 
Prague.  I hear and agree with what you're saying about film speed.  
Unfortunately I've become spoiled by medium-format (Hasselblad and a 6x9 
tech/field) and I like to feel that I'm getting the absolute maximum 
resolution and lack of grain possible from 35mm.  I use faster silde films 
for wildlife because I really don't have any choice.  One nice thing about 
Velvia is that pushed to EI 80 or 100 it's still sharper than any 100-speed 
film although you really have to watch the contrast.  The nice thing about 
Leica, too, is that in combination with the table-tripod and lenses that hold 
their sharpness at max. aperture, it's possible to shoot those slow films in 
light that would be impossible with my Nikons.
 
 <<As for lenses, from the outfit you describe, if I could only take 3 
lenses, I
 would add the 21mm and the 90mm to your 50mm. I think that the 90mm will be
 plenty long for you. On the short end, I find it absolutely essential to 
have a
 really wide lens with me when walking around any old city.>>

           I had thought about using the 28 rather than the 21 because it 
kind of bridges the gap where the 35 is missing, plus it's an easier lens to 
control (convergence of vertical lines) than the 21 (which for me has been 
always more of a scenic lens and a special-use one at that).  Perhaps this is 
because I'm used to shooting the 50mm in Hasselblad and 65mm in 6x9 which 
both correspond to 28mm in 24x36.  Have you any experience with the 21 vs. 28?

Thanks again for your excellent reply.
DT