Photoskeptic Posted February 18, 2007 Share #1 Â Posted February 18, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Forget about the LHSA version, what are the differences, if any? Both claim to have improved internals, so what makes the MP3 pricier? I was going to buy an M8 (might still), but I've been so disappointed with the problems associated with it that I'm considering another film body. Thanks for all replies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 18, 2007 Posted February 18, 2007 Hi Photoskeptic, Take a look here MP3 versus MP. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sandymc Posted February 18, 2007 Share #2  Posted February 18, 2007 1. MP3 has only the three classic framelines (35,50,90)  2. MP3 has exposed frame counter that must be manually reset  Internals are identical - extra money is largely for rarity value  Sandy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted February 19, 2007 Author Share #3 Â Posted February 19, 2007 Thank you, Sandy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edlaurpic Posted February 19, 2007 Share #4 Â Posted February 19, 2007 There are many differences between the two. Whether they matter to you is another matter. Â For people (like me) who find the later modern MP finder cluttered and prefer having just the three framelines of the classic M3, we find the MP 3 better than the M3. However, a shooter who wants to have a 28 frame line (hard to see as it may be), the recent MP is better. I personally prefer using external finders for the 28 and 21 lines. Â Cosmetically, the differences are significant, the most obvious being that the modern MP has perhaps (again IMO) the least attractive vulcanite of any M camera, and it is also not comfortable, again, that is for for my hands. By comparison, the MP3 has vulcanite much like the M3 or early M6, either of which in the view of some people, is better. SImilarly, the MP3 uses the raised window treatment for its view finder and rangefinder windows. Again, it's a matter of taste, but I prefer the M3's windows and therefore I prefer the windows of the MP3. Â Lastly, because I aactually owned the original MP until 1983, I really like the fine scroll and engraving of the MP3 body and MP3 leicavit over the very sterile (some would say "clean") markings of the recent MP. I also own the MP body, but I got an MP3 leicavit for it just because I prefered the engraving of the latter. (I actually have an extra new black MP3 Leicavit, by the way). Â Bottom line is some of these differences are subjective, others are real, such as the fewer and larger frame lines and raised viewfinder windows of the MP3. And, of course, there is the issue of the extent to which these cameras will depreciate/appreciate or whatever. In this respect, it is indisputable that the MP 3 is and will remain scarcer (ie. rarer) than the recent MP. Therefore, wherever the values of M film cameras may go (up, down, whatever), the MP3's value will outpace that of the recent, much more common MP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted February 19, 2007 Share #5 Â Posted February 19, 2007 I agree with the above completely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddp Posted February 20, 2007 Share #6 Â Posted February 20, 2007 And truth be told - if you spec out a similar MP via Ala Carte - you're not that far off the price of the MP3. Personally, I think my MP3 is the best modern M body I've used. It really is fantastic, and it's going to be a user. Â I picked up an M3 2 years ago - prob a '66 vintage, and that is one lovely machine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted February 21, 2007 Author Share #7 Â Posted February 21, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hey Dan, that is fantastic. Since the .85 viewfinders are so scarce, I'm looking for a good M3. Might trade my M4 for one or just buy one outright. Both Camera West and Photo Village have some for around a grand. It would be nice to put my paws on an MP3 but stuck in the Charleston area as I am it's not very likely. I still might get an M8 since I really only care about b/w...decisions, decisions, decisions... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brunom Posted February 21, 2007 Share #8 Â Posted February 21, 2007 Does the MP3 have an exposure meter,or am I thinking of another version? Â Bruno Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddp Posted February 21, 2007 Share #9 Â Posted February 21, 2007 The MP3 has the same exposure meter as the current MP.... Â Leica did introduce an MP "Classic" with no meter, 500 produced. Believe it may have been a Japanese market special. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brunom Posted February 23, 2007 Share #10  Posted February 23, 2007 Dan  Thanks  Bruno Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnkuo Posted February 24, 2007 Share #11 Â Posted February 24, 2007 Guys, this is not doing me any good. All of a sudden, I want to sell my nearly new M7 and get an MP3 set. I got an M8 now, so the AE feature of the M7 is not that important. Looks like only silver sets are available in most dealers. Would the silver 50 ASPH look funny on the black M8 body? I do have a black normal 50 ASPH, but having two of them seem too much... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnkuo Posted February 25, 2007 Share #12 Â Posted February 25, 2007 I'm wondering if anyone has a picture of the silver 50 LHSA on a black body, preferably M8? Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted February 28, 2007 Share #13 Â Posted February 28, 2007 Is the coverage that the framlines show identical to the MP/M7 or do they match the larger coverage of the original MP/M2/M4/M5? Â Â thanks, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
m4-2 Posted March 2, 2007 Share #14 Â Posted March 2, 2007 Nobody answers. so my first post ever: it`s the larger coverage. 24 x 36 mm as far as RF can match it, not the " cropped" ones. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted March 2, 2007 Share #15 Â Posted March 2, 2007 Nobody answers. so my first post ever: it`s the larger coverage. 24 x 36 mm as far as RF can match it, not the " cropped" ones. Â That's brilliant. Â But here's the hitch. I already have 6 M bodies and don't have $4300 for a MP3. Â Maybe I can puchase a MP3 frameline mask for my M7 and M6ttl... Â I think Leica would sell a lot of upgrades if they made this mask available, like they did the flare fix for the M6 finder. Â thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
m4-2 Posted March 2, 2007 Share #16 Â Posted March 2, 2007 For the MP a la carte you can order the classic framelines, so it should be possible, but i can`t find out anything about there coverage. The only thing in the MP3 i don`t like: the bottom line of the 50 mm frame is interrupted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MP3 Posted March 2, 2007 Share #17 Â Posted March 2, 2007 The 50 frameline in the MP3 has a larger coverage when compared to current 50 frameline in MP, optimised for med range to infinity shooting distance, resembling that of earlier Ms, M3/2/4. Â while other framelines, 35 and 90 bear the same coverage. All framelines in current M7/MP are optimised for close focusing. Â Best Matthew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
m4-2 Posted March 2, 2007 Share #18 Â Posted March 2, 2007 I can`t compare the 35 mm frame of the MP3 to M7/MP. But compared to the M6, it shows a larger coverage. Is there a difference M6 to M7/MP? Â thanks Jup. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.