What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Leica M3

Marco and Andy;

Thanks for the steer towards an M2. That is an interesting camera and solid. Are the quick load spools still available for these cameras? I am really looking forward to stepping into the 60's. My IIIc and I are in the 40's right now!

Thanks, Mark
 
Mark -- the quick-load spool hasn't been made in years. Occasionally one turns up on eBay. They make the loading a bit easier, but the original spool is almost as easy, once you get the hang of it. BTW, on the M2 the quick load spool is easier than on the M3, since on the M3 you have to pull the spool out to reset the film counter (which you do manually on the M2, thereby obviating the need to remove the spool before loading). Regards, Andy.
 
Hey Mark;

I used a quick-loading spool on my previous M3 & it does speed up loading a little. But to be honest, I would also second Andy's comment that the regular spool is pretty easy to use too. I didn't think there was that much difference between those two spools.

The biggest improvement in loading speed I made on my previous M3 was to upgrade to the M4-M6 loading claw. That was a lot quicker than the previous system, quick loading spool or not. The downside is the expense & finding a competent Leica service person to do it.

Try the normal spool first before you spend any additional dough. Besides, if you're used to a III series Leica, the M2 (with its flip-up back) will seem like it has motorized loading!
happy.gif


Regarding the solid feel of the M2 (and M3, which is very similar) - having used a couple of M3's, an M4-P & several M6TTL's, whenever I feel it's time to change my gear, it always comes down to keeping the M3. When I sold my first M3 to a friend, I regretted it for years. The one that I have now is staying with me.

I hate to go all mushy Leica-mystique here, but for whatever reason, I just enjoy operating the M3 even over the latest M6TTL. I've read Mr. Puts' fine articles, so in my head I know the M6 is a great camera. But to me, the M3 just feels better, advances nicer, and has a clearer view/rangefinder than anything else. Oh well, guess I'm just sentimental when it comes to my M3!

Regards,
Marco
 
Marco,

I fully agree with you re the M3. I could finally afford my "dream camera" of 40 years ago!
 
Marco,
Like yourself I parted with a M3, as a trade in for a M6. Had to have the hot shoe, easier loading, and of course built-in meter. But boy do I ever miss that M3, it was the greatest camera I had ever owned. Its finder was a pleasure to look thru, and I wear eyeglasses. If I ever come accross a M3 I just might buy it to keep for good.
 
Jon -

40 years ago indeed - My M3 was built almost 10 years before I was born! I looked it up once - it's an early model double stroke. It was converted to the contemporary shutter speeds, strap lugs, rangefinder DOF indicators & single stroke sometime before I acquired it.

Bob -

"Argh"! is the expression I remember uttering several months after I foolishly parted with my first M3! I thought the M6 was the answer, for exactly the same reasons you mentioned. The truth is, I didn't like the viewfinder on the M6 (even the 0.85x version) as much as the M3, & the rangefinder patch fadeout was really annoying. Like yourself, I wear glasses, and the M3 was still a wonderful camera to view thro'.

I've found that guessing & using a handheld incident meter to occasionally confirm exposures was actually a very accurate way to get good exposures. When I used the M6, I would often defer to the built-in meter, instead of using my brain. The M3 sensitized me to light levels more than the M6.

Anyway, there are still a lot of clean, operational M3's out there, for a reasonable price when compared to an M6. I got my second & current M3 a short while ago & it wasn't really that hard to find. I hope you get a chance to re-acquire one.

And I hope my own foolishness is a lesson to all the lucky M3 owners out there. Read my lips - DON'T EVER SELL YOUR M3!
happy.gif


Regards,
Marco
 
Hey you guys, I don't know what's all this fuss about M3 is all about. I'm a lucky owner of three M2's built in the late 50's. Of course I work also with other cameras like Canon 1N, Sinar, Hasselbladt etc. etc. I have to, because my Leica lenses 35mm, 50mm are so old that they can be used only for B&W photography, which is my main output. I use Canon only for color photography. Though I'm an old hand in the business of making pictures I still don't know what is the difference between M2 and M3. One thing is sure- I WILL NEVER PART WITH MY M2. It is the only camera I can really trust. I don't make stills as much as I did 20 years ago, because I'm working as photographer-editor for a Danish TV station and my photography is done with a video camera, but everytime I'm on location somwhere in the world- my Leica is always with me. Anyone who is out there- LISTEN- don't ever part with your Leica. I still would like to know the difference between M2 and M3. regards to you all george
 
My first Leica M was an M3 double stroke wind on. Loved the finder, hated the double stroke.
I love the M2 finder more, but only because I use a 35 and the M3 can't give me that without having a lens with specs on it (and I always found the view through the specs to be dreadful). Working with a 50 on the M3 is great because of the relatively high magnification of the finder. But you can't see much around the 50mm field like you can in the M2.
The viewfinder is the only REAL difference between the two.
Differences that go largely unnoticed include:
* construction of the shutter, the M2 is simplified but works just as well and for just as long
* improved light gathering for the M2 rangefinder patch and frame lines
* cosmetic difference in the front of the top plate (but some early M2s had the same design)
* the shape of the strap lugs on earlier M3s
* the lack of DoF indicators in the viewfinder patch of the (earlier) M3; later ones were given the DoF indicators that came along with the M2
* the earlier M3s had the old-fashioned shutter speed scale
* the M2's counter is manually reset; the M3's resets when the take-up spool is removed from the camera.
* in the M2 you only see the frame line of the lens you are working with; in the M3 the 50mm frame is there all the time.


On the topic of double stroke: does anybody on the forum use a double stroke M3 as their everyday camera? If so have you needed to have the wind-on clutch mechanism repaired (or even replaced) yet? Last I heard was that Leica wouldn't repair them and convert double wind M3s to single wind when they go in for servicing if there's wear.
 
Dear Andy,

An excellent summary of the essential differences, however you overlooked the most important:

The M3 has frame lines for the 50mm, 90mm and 135mm lenses in the viewfinder.

The M2 has frame lines for the 35mm, 50mm and 90mm lenses in the viewfinder.

The later M3 had the same shutter as the M2.

Do not try to chose between them as they each have unique merits. The solution is to have both.

Regards,

Justin
 
WOW I didn't know I could only use my IIIf RD 1953 and IIIg 1959 for B&W due= =20 to their age I guess I'll have to give back all those color prints I picked=20 up from the lab and apologize. Thanks for clueing my in on this.

Mark W.

Canonitis FD sufferer and collector of 1950s rangefinder cameras including=20 Braun/Paxettes and Leica LTM cameras and optics

Show and tell: http://awahlster.tripod.com/photo

Don't meddle in the affairs of Dragons, as you are crunchy and taste good=20 with ketchup! =20
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top