Jump to content

M2, M3 or M4 for a user/keeper?


Durr3

Recommended Posts

There is much info on the forums already about the differences between these models. Look in the Wiki section also.

 

Differences are mainly in the viewfinders - magnification and frame lines. The M3 only has frames for 50/90/135, so choice should really come down to which lens/es you want to use.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Main_Page

 

I always advise newcomers to buy from a dealer with a warranty - it may mean paying a little more, but if you buy privately and then find your camera needs servicing/repair, you will be looking at a much larger cost! Unless you know what to look for it saves a lot of hassle IMHO.

 

As for lenses, again, it depends on what you want. A 35 or 50 is probably best to start with for general photography. The classic Elmar 50 is a good lower cost option. The Voigtlander Skopar is also a great lens 35 or 50. Remember also that you can use Leica thread mount lenses on the M with a simple adaptor, which gives you many options to choose from.

Edited by earleygallery
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Having grown up with 35mm as my primary lens, I'd vote for the M4 as a first choice, followed by the M2. All said and done, though...you can't go wrong with any of these 3 bodies....IMHO they are a holy trinity. The VC 35 Color-Skopar is a bargain, especially if you get a good used one, and although the Elmar 50/3.5 looks like a fiddly old thing, it can produce wonderful shots. Are there "better" lenses...yes in the sense that they may be more usable in low light, that (depending on the model) they may have a common filter thread, that they may have sharper image resolution across a wider portion of the diagonal of the frame. Nevertheless....either or both of these two lenses should keep you smiling for years with your results once you master how to get the most out of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I contemplated the same question for years ... and then ended up with a brand-new M-A. Couldn't be happier. However this won't work with a $1,000 budget ... :o

 

Sticking to the original question—I'd recommend the M4. Or better yet, the M4-P. Quick-load film loading system and frame lines for six focal lengths are hard to beat. What would I do with my wonderful Summilux-M 75 mm when all I have was an M3, M2, or M4?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I join the reccomendation for M4-P which, besides the pluses above quoted, is probably the "best buy" in price/conditions mix : the "classics" M2/3/4 have good prices only when with significant signs of wear : this can be a no issue in user terms... BUT... is rather probable that the cost of a CLA is to factor into the total cost.

 

Your FIRST lens... all depending on budget : a CV 35 is a good choice... but as for my sentiment ;), if you prefer a 50 and budget is strict... don't forget that an Elmar 50 screw mount with adapter is a lens that one will never regret to have :)

 

M3 with DR Summicron is a great combo... but 1000$ isn't realistic... maybe even if DOUBLED...

Edited by luigi bertolotti
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Leica that "hooked" me in 1967 was a borrowed M2 with 50 f2.8 M mount Elmar. Because of that I bought a new M4 in 1968, and added a 50 Summicron in1969 and used it for 40 years.

I still love the 50 Elmar 2.8, and also have an M mount 50 Elmar 3.5, which has the same optics as the SM "red scale" Elmar, but the nicer aperture control of the 2.8. Either Elmar is a great match for either an M2 or 4.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Voigtlander 2.5 35 Color-Skopar.

 

This is a great lens with unbelievable value for money.

 

For a 50mm starter lens the Collapsible, Rigid or v3 Summicron are good options (though prices are on the up for the v3). A well-kept (coated) Summitar is also a great choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget about the summaron 35/2.8 as well, available with or without goggles so for use on M3 or M2 or M4. I've got one, as well as a summicron 35/2 V1, but not sure which I like better. And the summaron is there for voigtlander money... So really good value!

 

I had a goggled Summaron I tried on my M2. Obviously it makes sense on an M3 (better than a shoe mounted finder) but on the M2 it's pointless. It adds weight and the viewfinder image isn't as bright.

 

I also had the Skopar and after doing a side by side comparison I decided to sell the Summaron.

 

The Summaron is a lovely lens, don't get me wrong, but the Skopar is as good or better depending on your preferences.

 

The 'goggleless' versions command much higher prices than the goggled lenses, which makes the Skopar an even better bargain.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have had pretty much every M body at one time or another, usually in pairs. The only film M's I still have are a pair of M4's. I'm more interested in functionality than anything else, so I find just as the pros of the day did that the film loading and rewinding of the M4 is much quicker and easier than the M2 (unless equiped with a quick-load kit as mine were, plus an add-on rewind crank). Having the 135mm frame lines is nice too.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

M2 and ungoggled summaron 35/2.8 bought as s set might still fit the bill (if you get lucky). I bought mine from the university about 7 years ago for euro 750, as valued by an official dealer. Prices are increasing however.

Anyway, it is pretty much a M-A current version with a mechanical shutter delay thrown in for the bargain (must have feature, I love the sound of the mechanism). In summary you save $3700, it should last another 56 years more give or take a bit, and the summaron is as good as it gets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

If you shoot mostly 50 and 85 mm the M3 is the best choice, if you are a 35 mm man the M4-P is the best bang in buck...if you want to shoot colour and you need a TTL lightmeter the M5 is the best, it was Leica's last desperate attempt to compete with Nikon and Canon pro SLRs.

 

2gvvdjn.jpg

 

Sorry for the crappy pic, the Canon A-1 is pretty bad with interiors.

 

Anyway, in the end you must finish with something like that:

 

5lvu4g.jpg

Edited by Cuthbert
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.

×
×
  • Create New...