The great M3

[philcycles]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It seems that the M3 has almost disappeared from the Leica world, what with the M6, M9, Monochrom etc.

I myself had gone over the the M4 a long time ago.

But I got an M3 again just a few days ago and wow! what a camera.

The viewfinder id perfect for me. I mostly use a 50 so it's set up just right for me. And The keeping both eyes open trick still works perfectly. Mine just had a CLA and feels wonderful.

What a great camera.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello philcycles,

 

Welcome to the Forum.

 

A lot of people have & use M3's. They are especially nice with 90mm & 135mm (w/o goggles) lenses.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[AB007]

If I am not mistaken, I use my M3 w/50DR more than my other Ms (M9 included). The viewfinder is amazing.

[philipus]

I liked the M3, but much prefer the M4, which to me is the perfect M. The inclusion of 35 mm frames is important to me.

 

For my eyes, the M3 finder was still insufficiently magnified to be able to shoot with both eyes open. By that I mean that I was not able with both eyes open to focus the rangefinder quickly and easily. Yes, it is nice to have an almost life-sized view, but for me the M3's VF didn't do anything my M4 can't.

 

Plus I think the design of M4 is much nicer, though I admit that I do like the M3 rewind (which I have on my TTL). The M4's cleaner front gives it a "get the business done", no frills Bauhausey-kind of can-do look which I really like. I also didn't like (at all) the M3 film loading.

[TomB_tx]

After using a borrowed M2 in 1968, I considered both the M3 and the then new M4 - which were the same price. I bought the M4, as I also use 35mm a lot. Now my collection includes 2 M3s (early and late), and while they are nice, I still prefer the M4. A goggled Summicron 35 on the M3 isn't as nice to use as a plain 35 on the M4. However, be it M3,4,5,6, or 9 - whichever M I'm using at the time is great.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Everybody,

 

The not quite Bauhaus ridges that create the nifty little frames around the M3 & original MP front windows for rangefinder, frame outline & viewfinder are certainly Bauhaus in their operation (form follows function).

 

If you have the opportunity to use in parallel: An M3 & an M2, or 1 of the M2's descedants w/o the raised frames: You might notice that without the raised frames there sometimes are:

 

1. More smeared window. With & without fingerprints.

 

2. More damage & incidental impact in the areas around the front windows.

 

Like the M3 range/viewfinder: The additional protective frames make the top cover more expensive to make.

 

Hello Phillip,

 

Did you ever try a Quick Load for your M3? Contrary to the popular Urban Myth: They work very well (but differently) on an M3.

 

Not quite as quick as an M4 but considerably faster & easier than with a spool.

 

Yes: The M4 is nicer with a 35mm lens. But I wouldn't say the same about the 90mm or 135mm lenses. There the M3 is in a class by itself.

 

I never liked a 50mm lens. So for that I wouldn't say either way.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[aesop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello Everybody,

 

 

...<snip> Did you ever try a Quick Load for your M3? Contrary to the popular Urban Myth: They work very well (but differently) on an M3.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

 

...I have no idea what a Quick Load is, Michael, and despite its many advantages, I have always been put off getting an M3 because of what I perceive to be a relatively complex and fiddly film-loading regime. For me, the last thing I want when I am 'out there' is an additional complication during a critical operation such as film loading.

 

Could you (or anyone else) please expand on 'Quick Load'? I am a long-time film user - M6 since '86 and now MPs. Thanks.

[earleygallery]

It seems that the M3 has almost disappeared from the Leica world

 

I think Leica stopped making the M3 a few years ago

 

I had an M3 but never really got on with it for some reason. I think it is the rounded corners on the framelines, they kind of put me off. Sold it for an R3 and then many years later I bought an M2 which I really like.

[Guest]

A M6.85 has become the better M3 for me.

When photographing color slides with an M3 I needed the light meter MR4, which is somewhat impractical with its two-part scale.

When using filters the exposure must always be corrected.

An M6 with 0.85 viewfinder shows only a little smaller viewfinder than the M3, but it offers the TTL metering.

[Rona!d]

Encourages me to dig out my Solms serviced doublestroke M3 with quick load system. Thought about selling it, but this is a very nice "50mm camera" and mechanics feel so different compared to my new MP.

[}{B]

...I have no idea what a Quick Load is, Michael, and despite its many advantages, I have always been put off getting an M3 because of what I perceive to be a relatively complex and fiddly film-loading regime. For me, the last thing I want when I am 'out there' is an additional complication during a critical operation such as film loading.

 

Could you (or anyone else) please expand on 'Quick Load'? I am a long-time film user - M6 since '86 and now MPs. Thanks.

 

I wouldn't worry to much about the 'quick load' spool as opposed to the standard spool. My M3 has the quick load version. Whereas with the standard spool the film leader is pushed under a clip on the side of the spool and the film and spool then reinserted on the quick load this clip is absent.

 

Instead the quick load spool has a groove through which the leader is passed so that it curls inside the spool. It looks like it can be left inside the camera to load the film and I have done this but it is much easier to remove it as with the standard version.

 

My view is that if you are going to remove it, and it appears the most reliable way, then why not use a standard spool? The advantage of the standard version is that once the leader is firmly under the clip, my M2 spool even has an arrow to indicate how far to insert the film, then it is secure and will not slip. The procedure for loading the standard spool is not complex or fiddly once you have got the routine worked out. I've done it many times high on Scottish mountains without a problem.

[gyoung]

I can load my M3 (standard spool) almost as quick as my M6ttl, with 40 years of practice, especially if the M6 doesn't 'pick up' the leader first time, which happens fairly frequently. M3 much more certain, IMHO.

 

Gerry

[philipus]

Hi Michael

 

I have never heard of a quick load kit for the M3 but I found

- is that what you mean? Unfortunately my M3 developed a light leak problem which couldn't be fixed so I returned it after a few months.

 

Best

Phili

[animalhairs]

 

I think Leica stopped making the M3 a few years ago

 

I had an M3 but never really got on with it for some reason. I think it is the rounded corners on the framelines' date=' they kind of put me off. Sold it for an R3 and then many years later I bought an M2 which I really like.[/quote']

 

I totally hear you on being put off my the M3 frame lines. The rounded corners and overall thickness have always bugged me.

[gyoung]

Only the 50 has rounded corners, but so did the card Kodachrome mounts in those days

 

90 and 135 are exquisitely square, thin and complete,

unlike some of the frames on the 0.72 finder

 

Gerry

[animalhairs]

Only the 50 has rounded corners' date=' but so did the card Kodachrome mounts in those days

 

90 and 135 are exquisitely square, thin and complete,

unlike some of the frames on the 0.72 finder

 

Gerry[/quote']

 

It's definitely difficult to make a claim against it being the best M for shooting with a 135mm lens.

[CalArts 99]

The M3 is kind of like a 1960's sports car. There's a lot to appreciate and it's fun to drive in that old school way of driving. It's not about speed (they are slow in the modern sense) or about efficiency (petrol wasting and polluting and prone to a lot of fussy upkeep.) It's more about a certain tactile experience and an admiration for what once was. A nostalgia of a bygone era tied into a recognition of a particular period of craft.

 

But it's not really something you might want to always use on a daily basis (or take a long trip in.) Instead you'd have it for the weekend along with your current car and its more up-to-date conveniences and useability.

[kivis]

I use my M3 about 80% of the time. I love it.

 

[payasam]

Over 17 years starting in 1985, and again for a couple of years in this century, I found that an M3 with an accessory finder for 35mm was a fine option. As others have said, the M3 is the best for lenses 50mm and longer. The built-in meter was the only reason for my switch to an M6.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[kivis]

Don't mean to sound like Mr Smarty Pants, but not having a built in meter has made me a better photographer. I do sometimes use a light meter app on my iphone, but all and all, not having a meter has forced me to think. Anyway as you can see I am a Leica M3 fanboy.