starrynight Posted April 7, 2011 Share #1 Posted April 7, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello everybody. I've always been attracted to Leicas, so I recently figured its about time I get my very first film camera. My intial choice was a Leica CM (non zoom version), but I am now considering the legendary M3 rangefinder. Is this a wise desion for an amateur photographer who wants timeless images (down to me), and superior camera quality and optics? Should I buy a vintage M3 or settle for something like the Leica CM or even a Contax T2? I live in the UK. Kind regards Sam Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 7, 2011 Posted April 7, 2011 Hi starrynight, Take a look here Should I buy an M3?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Xmas Posted April 7, 2011 Share #2 Posted April 7, 2011 Yes or a M2 cause it is cheaper and more versatile. Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted April 7, 2011 Share #3 Posted April 7, 2011 Comes down to viewfinder/lens choice - the M3 has a 50mm viewfinder (widest) and the M2 goes out to 35mm. Later models such as the M4p are 28mm (but then there are later models still with different magnifications/framelines). My preference is for the M2 but that's because I mostly use a 35mm lens on it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
starrynight Posted April 7, 2011 Author Share #4 Posted April 7, 2011 Thank you for the quick replies. Would you recommend that I buy one from ebay and do I need to have it serviced beforehand? Also, if I decide it isn't for me, I've heard that they can be sold on for pretty much the same price as bought. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted April 7, 2011 Share #5 Posted April 7, 2011 Sam, I would also counsel in favour of an M2. if this is your first such Leica I would buy it from a reputable dealer with a warranty and a returns policy. A good M2 in sound working order can be found for less than £500. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
starrynight Posted April 7, 2011 Author Share #6 Posted April 7, 2011 Hi Bill. Why, in your opinion, is an M2 better? Isn't the M3 considered the best Leica, and indeed rangefinder camera, of all time? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted April 7, 2011 Share #7 Posted April 7, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Not by everybody The M3 vs M2 argument is a bit like M8 vs the M9 today - the former in each case was good but not quite right. The M2 is a more practical design and learns from the dead-end elements of the M3. The M3 viewfinder is .91 (from memory) whereas the M2 is .72 - the Leica standard for years thereafter until the advent of the .85 and .58 viewfinders with the M6 and later M7 and MP. The .72 field of view is well-suited to the 35mm focal length and the M2 shows that plus framelines for 50 and 90mm. The M3 with a higher magnification has framelines for 50, 90 and 135mm. To use a 35mm on an M3 necessitates either the awkward and bulky "goggled" 35mm lenses designed specifically for the camera or a separate viewfinder. The M3 is exceedingly well made but so is the M2, and you can usually find the latter at less of a "collector's premium". Hope this helps. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
starrynight Posted April 7, 2011 Author Share #8 Posted April 7, 2011 Yes Bill, that helps. I've actually found the M3 to be cheaper on ebay? Where can I find a cheaper M2? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted April 7, 2011 Share #9 Posted April 7, 2011 Try the dealers that advertise on this very forum. Mention that you are a member when calling. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beta Photography Posted April 7, 2011 Share #10 Posted April 7, 2011 Suprisingly prices of used M2s and M3s here in Japan have gone up, and you can find M6s classic cheaper than those two. Even good (near mint) condition M4 (just a normal silver one, not those rare black paint or black chrome) can go as high as used M7 and MP. M7 and MP in Japan somewhere between 2000USD - 3000USD. Older Ms in Japan are getting more expensive than newer used Ms. I don't know why.... Rgrds, Beta Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted April 7, 2011 Share #11 Posted April 7, 2011 Suprisingly prices of used M2s and M3s here in Japan have gone up, and you can find M6s classic cheaper than those two. Even good (near mint) condition M4 (just a normal silver one, not those rare black paint or black chrome) can go as high as used M7 and MP. M7 and MP in Japan somewhere between 2000USD - 3000USD. Older Ms in Japan are getting more expensive than newer used Ms. I don't know why.... Rgrds, Beta That does seem to be the case but If you get ones missing a lot of vulcanite, badly scratched strap logs surrounds showing brass and dinked like they had been thrown down stairs, they are more resonable. Lenses are worse i.e. >>>£... Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
starrynight Posted April 7, 2011 Author Share #12 Posted April 7, 2011 Shall I just get a Leica CM then? Or a Contax T2? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted April 7, 2011 Share #13 Posted April 7, 2011 Shall I just get a Leica CM then? Or a Contax T2? I presume you are joking get a 'proper' rangefinder, simplest to use is the M6, M3 is 'best', M2 only OK if you can see the 35 frame (not in my experience with glasses) Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
starrynight Posted April 7, 2011 Author Share #14 Posted April 7, 2011 Thanks Gerry. Why is the M3 best? Also, what is the price depreciation on an M3? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted April 7, 2011 Share #15 Posted April 7, 2011 Please. It's not a question of "best". It is a personal choice based upon taste and requirements. Neither is a bad camera; ignore the scaremongering. Buy assured from a dealer. Don't waste your money on a CM or a T2 (both of which I have had, btw.) Get an M into your hands and out of your system. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
starrynight Posted April 7, 2011 Author Share #16 Posted April 7, 2011 Thank you Bill, your posts are very helpful. What can I reasonably expect to pay for a Leica M3, either from ebay or anywhere else. I read somewhere that servicing is also essential to have the camera in top condition. P.S. I had a look at your book on Blurb - it is wonderful Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted April 7, 2011 Share #17 Posted April 7, 2011 Thanks Gerry. Why is the M3 best? Also, what is the price depreciation on an M3? Well, its the clearest viewfinder, with lovely sharp frames for 90 & 135 as well as 50, and the 135 is really useable. Not so good for 35 though, it works well with one of the special lenses for the M3, with the viewfinder adaptor (commonly known as 'goggles'), but the extra elements make it less clear than the M2/4/6 etc version, and the goggles make it a more bulky camera. The magnification of the viewfinder makes the rangefinder operation more precise too. Mechanicaly its the best made of the M bodies, in good order its quiet and silky in operation. Can't say about depreciation, I bought mine in 1968 brand new for the equivalent of less than £70 in canadian $, and it would cost a few times that amount to replace. I just wish it had a built in meter, and the equivalent of a DMR digital back (maybe DMM?) would be fun Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richam Posted April 7, 2011 Share #18 Posted April 7, 2011 Bill is right. Neither the Contax nor CM will give you the Leica M experience of having a precision instrument in your hands that responds in that special "M" way. For budget considerations, you might also check out the M4-2. They are newer and less likely to need extensive maintenance. The fact they were made in Canada tends to keep the prices a bit lower, relatively, than the German models. This is due to collector value, but the M4-2s are honest "M's." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted April 7, 2011 Share #19 Posted April 7, 2011 Personally I'd go for the M2 as I found the 35mm frame lines useful. Also with the M3 the 50mm frame lines are permanently displayed even if using a 90mm or 135mm lens. But it's an indivivual decision, and both are amazingly well engineered. If you use 35mm get an M2, if you prefer a 50mm get and M3. again, just my opinion. You should be able to find the going rate for either camera by doing a bit of searching on the Internet, but you should be able to find a body for 500-600 GBP. If you do get one I'd run a few rolls of film through it before deciding if it required a service. I've owned M2, M3 and M6 and never had any of them serviced. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted April 7, 2011 Share #20 Posted April 7, 2011 starrynight, if your favorite lens is 50mm, take M3, if you like 35mm as normal lens, take M2, M4P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.