dchalfon Posted January 31, 2010 Share #1 Posted January 31, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) i have found two leicas, one m3 with summilux 50mm 1,4 and the other a m4-2 with 50mm summicron. they are more or less in the same condition. the m3 sells US$ 1300 for and the m4-2 for US$ 1100 (body+lens). what is the better option? are they a good value for the lens the come if in the future i buy an m8? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 31, 2010 Posted January 31, 2010 Hi dchalfon, Take a look here leica m3 vs m4-2. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
luigi bertolotti Posted January 31, 2010 Share #2 Posted January 31, 2010 Welcome to the forum !!! As for lasting of the value, M3 is probably a better option... even if produced in numbers much greater than M4-2, it's an item of undisputed historical value. As for usability... about the same with a 50mmm... M4-2 has also the 35 mm frame which is surely a plus; M3 could be a old version... which needs 2 lever strokes to cock/advance and this is a (very small) issue for speed of operation... it could even have a shutter with "old style" times like 1/5 1/10... a bit strange but, again, just a matter of attitude. Remember, we are a forum with many people really hard passionate for Leicas... many of them (me included) could say that if you haven't ever had a M Leica, a M3 is mandatory to be in the CLUB... Both the lenses you quote are quite usable on M8... even if 50 mm is a focal a bit "strange" on M8's cropped frame (it's like a 67 mm on 24x36): Summicron has had a number of variants during its long history, and the one you found could be of a very old version and ahve suffered some wear : a mint example, even if very old, is still an excellent performer; same for the Summilux that, apart finishing, didn't change its optic for lot of years. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 31, 2010 Share #3 Posted January 31, 2010 A Summilux 50, unless really old or really in bad shape, is worth close to $1300 all by itself, so the M3/'lux combo would be the best value unless the camera is a complete basket case. For practical use, the drop-in film loading and rewind crank of the M4-2 are faster and more rational than the M3 system, which requires inserting the cassette, film leader, and take-up spool all simultaneously. The M3 is a fine old machine if one shoots one roll a month at leisure. The M4-2 is a much better tool if one shoots 3 rolls an hour (at times) in the heat of the action. I'd strongly recommend you try the film-loading process with both cameras before choosing. As Luigi said, 50mm makes a nice very short telephoto on the M8. In fact - I don't like 50mm on 24 x 36 much at all, but used it a lot on the M8. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted January 31, 2010 Share #4 Posted January 31, 2010 I've had M3 and M4. Unless you plan on shooting a 35 sometime in the future my bet is for the M3. The viewfinder and frame lines are so much better, IMO. Look through both the ones you are considering and see for yourself. Also, although the film loading is easier with the M4, the loading of the M3 is more positive, ie you will not have a misload as is possible with the M4. The film rewind knob on the M4 is quicker. Decisions, decisions. Good luck. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted January 31, 2010 Share #5 Posted January 31, 2010 An M3 will be nicer to use then a M4-2, some people are very tactile, If the M4-2 is late in the production run the viewfinder will be more prone to flare, neither the feel or flare annoy me though. You can get the retro fit quick load kit for the M3, which is not as slick as the M4-2, but stops me juggling the baseplate and the camera, the camera may have it fitted already,if it was used by a pro. I'm clumsy. If you don't have a warranty the risk is that a service is expensive, for either camera.. Noel. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richam Posted January 31, 2010 Share #6 Posted January 31, 2010 I have them both. I'm more likely to take the M4-2 traveling because of the 35mm frame lines, quick loading, fast tilted rewind crank, and ability to use the Leica motor-winder. I believe the Canadian manufactured M4-2s have as good a build quality as any M, but tend to be better bargains due to non-German origin. OTOH, the M3 is considered a classic and will likely retain it's value better. If you get the M3 and ever plan to use IR film, I'd keep the old style loading and take-up spool. It's more positive to load by feel in darkness or in a changing bag. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted January 31, 2010 Share #7 Posted January 31, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Cameras get old like cars and parts deteriorate. In cameras it is balsam cement in lenses, rangefinder prisms, and rubber shutter curtains deteriorate. All can be repaired at a cost. The M4-2 will only suffer the curtain problem and should last longer as it is 20+ years younger. The M3 range finder mechanism is superior to anything ever produced. It was made at the height of German craftsmanship. If you operate both cameras and they are both clean and lubicrated properly, the smother operation of the M3 will be obvious. The frame lines are superior in the M3 and more accurate. Sometime the finder patch whites out if ther is a light source in the upper corners because a condenser lens is missing in the RF mechanism. Cost cutting. Later summicron lenses will be superior. Hard to tell exactly what is on the cameras you are considering. I would agree you are less likely to have problems with the M4-2. The flash sync went on mine shortly after purchasing it new. been fine since, but it has seen little use. Careful with the sync plug as it is mounted in plastic. Previous cameras were mounted metal fixture. See what I mean. Cost cutting. Budget $300 for repairs to clean an lub at some point. I have never purchased a used one that did not need it. Good luch what ever you decide. Keep in mind you willl eventally own more than one like the rest of us. I have 7. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted January 31, 2010 Share #8 Posted January 31, 2010 (edited) Hi I've had a shutter ribbon snap, in an M4 that was not 10 years old and one that lasted 40 years in an M4 before it snapped, the rubberised fabric will only fail it the camera is misused, i.e. Leica supply a lens cap with every lens. 7 is a bad number you need another... Noel Edited January 31, 2010 by Xmas declentionerror Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dchalfon Posted February 1, 2010 Author Share #9 Posted February 1, 2010 Thanks everybody. Here is the m4 MercadoLivre: LEICA M4-2 COM OBJETIVA - R$ 2000.00 and the m3 MercadoLivre: Leica M3 - R$ 2250.00 unfortunately i cannot check them because they are on an auction site Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted February 1, 2010 Share #10 Posted February 1, 2010 After seeing the pictures, I'd say go with the M4 - the M3 is a double-stroke (early) with a 3.5 50 which, compared to more modern lenses, will most likely not be as sharp - unless that is what you are looking for. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandro Posted February 1, 2010 Share #11 Posted February 1, 2010 When you are interested in an early M3 and you like the finder with the 50mm lines you should go for that one, and it should give you a nice return when you would decide to sell it sometime. The 3.5 50 mm Elmar is not as nice for general work as the Summicron though, pushing you in the direction of the M4-2, which is a great camera itself as well. You should decide if you want to see the buy more as an investment, or to work with right away. As a collector I'd buy the M3 and take the 3.5 Elmar for granted, but to start work with I'd say the M4-2 may be better suited in your case. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richam Posted February 1, 2010 Share #12 Posted February 1, 2010 After seeing the pictures, I'd say go with the M4 - the M3 is a double-stroke (early) with a 3.5 50 which, compared to more modern lenses, will most likely not be as sharp - unless that is what you are looking for. Amen. Since you have an Elmar instead of a Summilux, a double stroke M3, and what looks like a service tag in the much newer M4-2, the latter is more likely to function properly without any additional service. When I got my ebay M4-2, it was a bit stiff. So I exercised it by cocking the shutter and releasing it 10 times on every shutter speed. After that, it's been very smooth and accurate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 1, 2010 Share #13 Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) Uhm... the M3 is a really old one... more to be considered as a collectible, indeed an interesting one for it belongs to the first batch of M3s (700001 - 710000 - 1954) ; its Elmar 50 3,5 is a usable but also an "oldie"; the M4-2 looks also very used but it can worth a good CLA and become an excellent user item. Check the Summicron 50... if it's clean and unscratched, it is an excellent taking lens. Edited February 1, 2010 by luigi bertolotti Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
al-fresco Posted February 1, 2010 Share #14 Posted February 1, 2010 I had a similar choice between an M6 and an early (but recently serviced) M3 - I went for the M3. No regrets. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted February 2, 2010 Share #15 Posted February 2, 2010 A late M f/3.5 50mm will perform as well as a 60s f/2.8, i.e. made before the high index '90s variant, but it is a triplet, i.e. high contrast and if you are critical you need to use smaller then f/5.6, i.e. it is not a lens for night club photos. Lots of people still use the 3.5 or 2.8 Elmars. Noel Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted February 2, 2010 Share #16 Posted February 2, 2010 The black version 3 Summicron on the M4-2 is a much better lens than the 3.5 Elmar. I like the "character" the elmar produces and do use mine, but it is not considered a modern lens. It is the best of the classic Leica normal 50 mm lenses. Bring a small pen light or keychain light and shine it thru front and rear of the lens while looking thru the other end. If not cyrstal clear, it needs maintenance. Internal fog to even a slight degree will degrade the Leica image and you will be disappointed. Tone reproduction & contrast suffer long before sharpness starts to go. The inside needs to look like a quality drinking glass brand new. I have both the lenses and both required an internal cleaning. Both lenses are top of the heap for the type of lens they are, so either is a fine choice depending on what you want. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted February 2, 2010 Share #17 Posted February 2, 2010 Hi (Such) A lens service is not cheap either. Noel Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixstring Posted June 30, 2010 Share #18 Posted June 30, 2010 (edited) Hi dchalfon! M3 is an absolute joy to use! I bought mine three months ago after months of brain torture. I was divided between M3, M6, M7 & MP. It is my very first Leica M and I finally adopted a fine 2009 cla'd SS M3 because of its .92 viewfinder. I only use 50 mm. Having used Nikon F4/F3HP/FM2/FE2's for the last 20 years, I wasn't very eager to carry along my sekonic light meters on a permanent basis. (I did that when I was a photography student...) BUT.... I kind of remembered the old school sunny-16 rule and started to apply that again since the M3 purchase. Forget about light meters. Use your eyes, then your brain to analyze and finally your heart to fine-tune. Using the M3 is like filing your lungs with fresh air, like being a wolf with its nose to the wind and... compose. I certainly hope that film will never disappear. The M8 & M8.2 are crap. (not full frame, what the heck!?! Leica, what were you thinking??) M9 might be ok, but film has a physical depth and a grey value & color spectrum which digital can not tip, yet... The mechanical precision on the M3, the smoothness of its operation is beyond words. I own quite a lot of camera's in all formats, but never ever have I been so amazed while using an M... (read: M3) Get an M3 from a respectable resales person, eventually recently cla's and you should be happy as happy can be. (I got mine at ffordes.com) (another good place would be meister-camera.de) But get an M3 and don't use a lightmeter, you'll see, it's back to the roots, it's pure, real! Edited June 30, 2010 by Sixstring Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.