Jump to content

M3 vs M2


Recommended Posts

Keith, Welcome to the forum!

 

Nice image....saw it over on RFF the other day. How long have you owned both cameras? Which differences have you noted as a user? I've only used an M2 briefly, but use my M3 regularly.

 

There's many cosmetic differences between the models in addition to what you have noted, as well as features.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had the M2 a couple of months and the M3 a year or so. The cameras feel indentical to use ... both are a delight with their silky feel and the shutters sound very similar. I find the rangefinder patch a little more distinct on the M2 but the M3's viewfinder seems a little brighter. The M2 just seems like a better camera to me and the frame counter arrangement suits me more! :)

 

Oh ...and thanks for the welcome! ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're very welcome!

 

I always keep my eyes open for an M2 - I like the frame counter on it as well. I forgoet off the top of my head some of the other differences - lack of self timer may be one. I know the M2 was designed to be more affordable for the user...

 

I was offered one several years ago for $700 with a small 50 on it. Should have grabbed it then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Keith,

 

What a surprise to find you here - I hope your Leica acquisition program is still going strong and according to plan! I notice the Canon 2/35mm lens that we discussed in the past, sitting on the M2 - nice lens!

 

As to the differences between the M2 and M3 - the M2 was originally offered as a cheaper alternative to the M3. It had a less expensive to produce top plate, simpler finder, manual film counter, the early versions had no self timer and just a button to rewind the film, instead of the lever like on the M3.

 

It was the different finder however, that made the camera very popular with journalists who used the 35mm lenses often and preferred the M2's frame display. That is why subsequent Leica M2's re-incorporated the selftimer and the rewind lever of the M3. The camera became very popular not because of its price, but because of what made it different from the M3.

 

The M4, which followed the M2 and the M3, incorporated the best from both cameras, including the M2's 0.72 finder with an added 135mm frame.

 

Welcome to the forum!

 

Kind regards,

 

Jan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi there Jan,

 

Fancy bumping into you here ... a pleasant surprise. I was thinking about you the other day ... I pulled the electro apart to readjust the rangefinder and give the viewfinder a clean. I really like that little camera and it always has a roll of film in it ready to go. Hard camera to take a bad pic with actually and the lens is sensational!

 

I'm pretty well Leica'd out now and have all the models I really need ... the M2 in the pic has turned out to be a gem and is definitely my favourite M and looks great in the black Luigi case which I actually bought for my M7 ... which sadly languishes in the cabinet ... I have discovered I really do prefer meterless cameras!

 

My favourite screwmount has turned out to be a black 1936 II I picked up six months ago ... very pretty camera! :)

 

Cheers from downunder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the M2 for it's clear, uncluttered viewfinder. I use a 35mm focal length a lot (I think most of us do) but the frame counter being external and user set is a problem for me. Sometimes I forget to set it when I begin a new roll of film and when I come back to my camera after not shooting for a while I occassionally don't know what frame I'm on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Friends, anyway, the real magnification of the M2 rangefinder is 0.77x. If you look inside of viewfinder of the M2, the 35 framelines are to the extreme of viewing, you get a large area inside of 35 framelines. In the M4-P and M6 (0.72x), the 35 framelines are more distant from the max limit of viewing (better viewing for spectacles) you get a narrow area inside of 35 framelines, infact the extreme framelines is 28 (like, nearly 35 in the M2). M2-R have the same bright viewfinder of the M4 (no rectangle mask to the ocular) but the framelines are like the conventional M2 framelines system.

 

Summary: M3 ------> 0.91x

M2 ------> 0.77x

M4 ------> 0.77x

M4-2 ---> 0.77x

M5 ------> 0.77x

M4-P ---> 0.72x

M6 ------> 0.72x

M6J -----> 0.85x

M7 -------> 0.72x (0.58x ; 0.85x)

MP -------> 0.72x (0.58x ; 0.85x)

 

Best regards to all of you

 

giuseppe ciccarella

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Giuseppe, and welcome to this forum! What you say about the different size of the brightline frames in older versus newer Leica-M cameras is true, however, I believe the reason for this is not a different viewfinder magnification, but simply a different size of the respective frames in the various models. I have tried to explain that in another post today already, which reads:

 

"on older M-Leicas as your M2 the brightlines for 35mm (and, for that matter, all other brightlines as well) are actually located further out than in todays M7 and MP models. That is because in the old days the brightlines were sized to match with a minimum focusing distance of 1m, whereas the current brightlines need to cope with the 0.7m minimum focusing distance. Although the difference in minimum focusing distance may seem small at first, it makes a noticeable difference to the brightlines. With the current models, seeing the 35mm brightlines is no real problem, even if you wear specs."

 

Enjoy this forum,

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Giuseppe, and welcome to this forum! What you say about the different size of the brightline frames in older versus newer Leica-M cameras is true, however, I believe the reason for this is not a different viewfinder magnification, but simply a different size of the respective frames in the various models.

 

 

Andy is correct. There never was a .77 version. Only .58/.72/.85/.91

 

In the M2/M3/M4/M5/M4-2 and some M4-P cameras the framelines show a larger area of coverage, than in the newer bodies. As an example, the 50mm framelines in any of these bodies shows the coverage at 1 meter.

 

Starting with the M6 Leica shrank the amount of coverage that all markings show to reflect the new close up distances the modern lenses were capable of focusing at. An example: In the newer cameras the 50mm markings show the coverage at 70 cm, instead of 1 meter. Older 50mm lenses only focused as close as 1 meter. The newer versions focus as close as 70cm.

 

Basically the idea is that Leica is indicating the absolute minimum amount of the image you will get on film. The reason why the amount of coverage changes at different distances, is that the actual focal length of the lens changes ever so slightly as you focus from close-up to infinity. So, when focused at 70cm your Summicron may truly be a 50, but when set at infinity it turns into perhaps a 47mm. The framelines do not compensate for the shift in focal length. They only compensate for parallax error in x and y, not z (depth).

 

The only problem is that in doing so Leica made all markings on the newer cameras from 50mm up very inaccurate at normal working distances (3-10 meters and infinity), because you are starting out with a much smaller area of coverage (70cm vs 1 meter).

I do not expect 100% accurate framing from a rangefinder camera (that is what an SLR is for), but we've gone from the markings being reasonable accurate, to being wildly off the mark. With the new style markings you will end up with as much as 20% more on your negative than you expect.

 

I for one will not shoot anything longer than a 35 on my modern bodies, because the 50 markings are so inaccurate. The 50 ends up on my M2 or M4.

 

(another way to look at it is like this. The new markings show what you get on a framed slide. The old markings show what you get on the whole negative.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the gentle welcome, that you say it’s right, but, if you can read in the early pages of “LEICA M: Hohe Schule der Fotografie” 1985 Umschau Verlag Bredeisten GmbH, Gunther Osterloh present the M2 with that magnification: 0.77x. So, i don’t invent nothing, it’s true.

 

By the way, my M2-R it’s my prefer M, recently i have ship her to Genova to the historical Leitz Service, seal “G” (do you remember Ing. Ippolito Cattaneo Italian Distributor: ’30 – ‘40 – ’50 –’60 – ’70) for the CLA. Now the advance lever it’s smooth like “butter”, better of new camera. With Eur 250 you got a perfect CLA, like Wetzlar Service eve.

 

Thank so lot for your courtesy.

 

Regards

giuseppe ciccarella

Link to post
Share on other sites

ciao giuseppe and all friends up there,

very interesting to understand that leitz genova service is still working.

 

i use with great pleasure a leica m4 with a 50mm summicron and i'm wondering about a m2 or m3. one important (personal) point would be year 1955 related. i know that m3 was alive in that time, but how about m2? were those cameras both in production during 1955? if so, where i can find a m2 timetable?

 

many thanks!

 

flavio

Link to post
Share on other sites

.......... i know that m3 was alive in that time, but how about m2? were those cameras both in production during 1955? if so, where i can find a m2 timetable?

 

many thanks!

 

flavio

 

Flavio,

 

The M2 was introduced in 1958 - this link will provide more information:

 

Leica Serial Numbers: M and R Sorted by Number

 

All the best,

 

Jan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jan,

thank you very much. I'll click there in order to better realize, then I'll look for something to purchase in the used market. Is there any reseller to advise (in Europe)?

 

Thanks again, I'm pretty beginner on this forum. After some thoughts about M8 and digital photo, I'm back to the film :-) Overall quality seems another thing.

 

Flavio

Link to post
Share on other sites

......... Is there any reseller to advise (in Europe)?........

 

Flavio

 

Hello Flavio,

 

I am in Vancouver (Canada) and you are in Italy..... Maybe another member of the forum, located in Europe, will be able to help. You might try posting the question on the Film Forum or the Customer Forum - a lot of European M users there.

 

All the best,

 

Jan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the gentle welcome, that you say it’s right, but, if you can read in the early pages of “LEICA M: Hohe Schule der Fotografie” 1985 Umschau Verlag Bredeisten GmbH, Gunther Osterloh present the M2 with that magnification: 0.77x. So, i don’t invent nothing, it’s true.

 

By the way, my M2-R it’s my prefer M, recently i have ship her to Genova to the historical Leitz Service, seal “G” (do you remember Ing. Ippolito Cattaneo Italian Distributor: ’30 – ‘40 – ’50 –’60 – ’70) for the CLA. Now the advance lever it’s smooth like “butter”, better of new camera. With Eur 250 you got a perfect CLA, like Wetzlar Service eve.

 

Thank so lot for your courtesy.

 

Regards

giuseppe ciccarella

 

That must be a mistake in the book.

 

I own an M2 and M4. Both of these cameras are .72 and they have identical size markings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear friends, nothing mistake. Do you remember? "Leitz Means Precision. Worldwide". Gunther Osterloh was an very important person on Leitz establishment. He can't do about it error on this easy theme. Anyway, everybody can think about it what he/she want.

 

Flavio for your question you can call my friend of Milan to this number: +39 (0)289011338.

He can give you what you find. Don't worry, call him.

 

"When the M2 was in the production, the assemblers for this camera had to undergo a three and half year apprenticeship and work their way up to the assembly line". No such program exists today as it would likely be cost prohibitive.

 

Old Leitz craftmanship is the best.

Then, the Swiss Wild arrived and so the cost savings and the money gain was the first and most important choice for them, so bye bye to Leitz Family tradition and go to M4-2 (dog or bargain?) and plastic inside of the 35/2 Summicron (7lens, 1979), for only brief examples.

The start to the end of Leitz. The logo, infact no longer exist after 1988.

 

Modern no ever is the best.

 

Regards brothers and friends

 

*Please don't hate me, but i'm an orthodox of Ernst Leitz Wetzlar GmbH.

 

Please stay with us. Visit my site. PASSIONE LEICA Storie ed Immagini

 

My mail is: joseph_galilee@gawab.com

 

 

giuseppe ciccarella

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear friends, nothing mistake. Do you remember? "Leitz Means Precision. Worldwide". Gunther Osterloh was an very important person on Leitz establishment. He can't do about it error on this easy theme. Anyway, everybody can think about it what he/she want.

 

 

Sorry, Joseph, but printing mistakes happen in the publishing business, regardless of who wrote the book.

 

There never was a .77 variation of the M2. Maybe you read about a prototype or something, but all normal M2 cameras coming off the production line were .72. That's a fact and therefore not really open to debate or individual opinion.

 

What you are seeing are the differences in coverage that the various versions of the frameline mask show.

 

Contact Don Goldberg, Sherrry Krauter, Jerry Kinderman, James Lager or any of the other Leica experts and you'll get the same answer.

 

There was the .91 finder in the M3 and everything else was or is .72, with the exception of the .58 and .85 models. The M8 is .68, but for the moment lets stick to film cameras.

Link to post
Share on other sites

.........There never was a .77 variation of the M2. Maybe you read about a prototype or something, but all normal M2 cameras coming off the production line were .72. That's a fact and therefore not really open to debate or individual opinion............There was the .91 finder in the M3 and everything else was or is .72, with the exception of the .58 and .85 models. The M8 is .68, but for the moment lets stick to film cameras........

 

Absolutely correct and factual.

 

Jan

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...