The great M3

[CalArts 99]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think that 'guessing' probably isn't the proper way of describing photographing without metering (and at almost every frame like some people feel is necessary.) I'm pretty critical about the quality of the ambient light and try to photograph always under light that I'm familiar with. If I encounter light that's different or if it changes, then I'll use an incident meter that I carry or use the in-camera meter (e.g., M6.) I do this not only with negative film but also reversal film (which I use primarily.)

 

After all this time, I've gotten to where I can read the light just like my meter does. My 'guesses' are identical. So they aren't really 'guesses' but more like learned calculations. If I've become comfortable with it and find out that the meter says the same thing, then I don't feel that I need to use the meter all the time. And if the light remains the same then metering isn't necessary.

 

I don't think anyone is advocating doing away with metering devices. I'm certainly not. And especially if working where the light is unknown and/or changes a lot. Anyway, my initial comment wasn't about meter or no meter, but only that I personally find the M3/M2 to be slower (for me) than the M4/M6 which I find facilitates film changing a lot better. Maybe I just have clumsy hands or something but if I were to ever get a new MP, I'd go with the slanted rewind.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[payasam]

I find working with my present substantially M6 faster than it was with the M3, M2 I had earlier. Metering is the most important part of this, although I like the faster rewind also. Loading was never a problem, but then I work happily with screw mount models too.

[friedeye]

I love my M3 for its build and haptics. It's a sensual camera to use. I enjoy the mathematics of sunny 16 and the self sufficiency of meterless shooting - but, yes, it can be slower in light shifting situations. For street shooting, I generally use shutter priority and that makes it pretty fast. I also use my IIIf this way. Call me a Luddite, but this analog connection to the instrument is the same thing that attracts me to the manual focusing of a rangefinder. I guess the analogy to a classic car is apt; a stick shift, to me, is more fun to drive.

 

As far as loading, after using the IIIf for many years, I greatly appreciate the M3. Much easier. And all Leica film Ms have the annoying bottom plate that comes off and has to be stashed somewhere, usually a back pocket, during reloading on the street.

 

If I want convenience, a bright, clean finder, easy loading and a meter, I use my Zeiss Ikon. Lovely camera. But...

 

The M3 feels special in my hands, and gives me a chill of pleasure when I advance the film with buttery precision and hear the shutter whisper.

[Brenton C]

When my digital camera, which I never liked, died, it occured to me to at least invest the effort to Google up on my 30 year old Leica fantasy.

 

How delighted I was to find this community, and learn that these old film cameras "still got it."

 

Still got something, anyway, that's to be appreciated and sought after.

 

I've been enjoying my M3.

 

I like my modern conveniences, too, but for some things the traditional way has not adequately been bettered. Straight razor shaving, the feel of my Parker 51, the sound of vinyl through vacuum tubes (oh my my), and a full manual, mechanical Leica camera.

[klaush]

I love my M3 for its build and haptics. ...

The M3 feels special in my hands, and gives me a chill of pleasure when I advance the film with buttery precision and hear the shutter whisper.

 

I couldn´t explain it better. That is as it feels in my hands.