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

I enjoy studying the differences between Leica M models, esp. the M2/3/4. I'm with Justin, however, as to the essential difference between the M2 & M3 - it comes down to the finder. As a user, that's the most important thing for me between the two models.

If the 35mm was my main lens, the M2 is the obvious choice. Since 50mm is my favourite, then there's nothing nicer for me than the M3.


Andy - regarding the double stroke M3 being replaced by the single stroke during a repair - I'm wondering if that's what happened to my current M3 before I bought it.

There are obvious signs (besides the serial #) that my M3 was an early double stroke. The rewind, self-timer & frame levers are the older, slighter taller version. There are small marks on both sides of the metal top plate indicating that this camera used to have the triangular, side-mounted lugs.

Sometime during its life, the M3 was upgraded to include the single stroke, newer shutter speeds & DoF patch. The single stroke action is very smooth & reliable.

When I had my first M3 (also a DS) upgraded, I had the technician switch out the DS for a single stroke. More for user convenience on my part than anything else. Some say the DS is smoother, but I honestly couldn't tell the difference. I much preferred having the single stroke (which you can use as a double stroke, anyway).

Regards,
Marco
 
Marco,

Check the pressure plate, the early ones were glass.

Again yours could have been upgraded when converted to single stroke etc.

Best wishes,

Justin
 
Hey Justin;

Good point. Both DS M3's I owned had metal plates but the time I owned them. As you say, probably added during an upgrade.

Another thing I've noticed is that older M models that are in good shape (i.e., not abused) when I buy them used, tend to be in perfect working order. I'm speculating that any bugs have been long repaired by their previous, careful owners.

The only time I had a major problem with a Leica M body was a brand new, 0.85x M6TTL that I bought in 2000. After a few times out, the counter refused to advance. I returned it to my retailer who promptly replaced it with another one (and to Leica Camera's credit, they sent me a Leica flash & an M grip for my troubles, free of charge).

I'm not slagging the M6TTL, but I must say that it's the only M body that I had to return(for reasons other than regular maintenance) due to a malfunction.

Regards,
Marco



Regards,
Marco
 
Hi,
I am looking illustrated instructions to remove top of Leica M4 to clean viewfinder.
Pls help
bk
 
B.K.
Unless you are a trained technician, I recommend you not do it your self. The viewfinder mechanism is delicate, and expensive to replace.
Good Luck,
Sal
 
Greetings from New Zealand!

A few years ago I bought a DS M3 then traded it at Christmas for an M6. A lovely camera but I didn't like the viewfinder flare and I missed the all metal feel of the M3. I even liked the M3's "old-fashioned" (actually European) shutter speed sequence, and double-wind action. But the shutter had a light leak - noticeable when changing lenses, and the double-wind mechanism was not always accurate - and I reckoned the built-in light meter would be useful, so these were all reasons to change.

But then the M6's rangefinder needed adjusting so, after agonising for a while, I have now traded back to a SS M3 plus original Summicron - not cheap but in B+ condition.
I have just got it and am putting through my first film.

A few qustions: 1) Any advice on light metering? I have a selenium meter but am keen on the Gossen digisix or Sekonic 308.

2) has anyone actually ever noticed any difference between a glass pressure late and a metal one?

3) How do you usethe DOF indicators in the later M3 viewfinder?

Many thanks, David.
 
David, greetings from Cumbria, which is not unlike New Zealand, except you=20 don't have Sellafield at the seaside.

What selenium meter are you using? If it's a Weston Master I''d stick with=20 it as long as it's working and you have the Invercone for incident readings.= =20 However I would heartily recommend the Sekonic 308. I have used mine (a=20 308B) daily for four years and am on the second battery. It's very accurate=20 and very reliable. I had wondered about getting a spot meter (Sekonic's are= =20 wonderful and waterproof, which might be as much a plus in New Zealand as it= =20 would be in Cumbria, but rather too expensive for me). A number of retailer= s=20 in the UK are discounting (=A3170 from =A3220) a thing called the Polaris Du= al 5,=20 which looks pretty good - ambient, spot and flash. But I know nothing about= =20 it. See it at www.linkcameras.co.uk.

I could never tell the difference between the results from an M3 with a glas= s=20 pressure plate and one with metal.

And the DoF indicators? The top one shows what's in acceptable focus using=20= a=20 50mm lens at 16 and the bottom on at 5.6. If the image displacement at thos= e=20 apertures is within the limits of the cut-outs then that part of the image=20 will be in acceptable focus.

Hope that helps.

Andy
 
Dear David,

Endorsing what Andy has said, I have never noticed any difference between the glass and metal pressure plates. Contemporary literature at the time of the change said it was done to prevent static electricity marks!!! I suspect metal was not as expensive to manufacture to the same tolerance.

As to the depth-of-field indicators, I have found them of no use in practice. They assume a circle of confusion for half-plate prints and smaller. That, I suspect, is why they were not continued after 1967.

Regarding metering, may I add to Andy's suggestion with the Voigtländer VC meter with the caveat to use only with negative film. For transparencies there is not much that beats the Sekonic or Weston with Invercone.

Have fun with one of the greats.

Justin
 
Good point Justin, ref the DoF indicators. They are fine(ish) if you're getting prints made up no bigger than 5x7, but anything bigger really does shows up the antiquated thinking behind the DoF indicators.
Interestingly enough the lenses Contax produced for its rangefinders between the wars - and after for that matter - had massively generous DoF scales on them (sometimes twice as generous as Leica) on the assumption that most people would never get enlargements bigger than postcard size where unsharpness is that much less obvious.
 
Must agree with all of the above. I also had similar troubles with my old DS. It had a metal plate however. Although selenium cells are quite nice when working well I understand that they have a limited life span and can't be repared. I've got a Leica Meter MR (M4P vintage from memory) on my current SS M3 and have found it remarkably good in most situations. Would highly recommend this awkward looking meter if you can find a later model in good nick. Its got me out of trouble on many occations For critical stuff I use a pentax spot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top