M3 vs iiig

[stvn66]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have both and after much thought and reading the many posts I can narrow it down quite simply.

If I were to go with my head it is the M3, if I go with my heart it is the iiig.

As much as I enjoy the M3 it just does not excite me visually or in its use compared with the outstanding beauty of the iiig and the delicate, slow use that I execute when using it.

I personally feel the iiig is the most beautifully crafted camera I have ever owned, it may not be perfect but I don't care, I just love using it:)

There, I've said it. As a romantic guy my preference is the iiig with still much respect for my M3

 

[Rhys]

My first Leica was a iiif BD and I really liked it until I found it had poorly curtains so got sent back, but only after ruining several rolls of Portra while on holiday. I bought a 9cm finder to go with it as I bought a 9cm Elmar f4 to go with the Summitar on the iiif. Unfortunately the Summitar had to be returned with the iiif. Scroll forwards some months and I chanced upon a iiig with 1936 Summar 5cm f2. I think the Summar was thrown in with the iiig to make a usable camera as it had a lot of internal haze and scratches to the front. Then I bought an Elmar 5cm f2.8 (which I think came with the iiig and was split by the previous owner when he put them for sale). I wear glasses and managed to use the iiif, so the iiig is a doddle. I don't need my 9cm Leitz external finder now but am hankering over a 35mm..I've since stripped the Summar and made a hood for it and it's turned out to be a lovely lens to go with the iiig for a more vintage look.

I love the build of the iiig as it feels really solid the same as the iiif but just more usable. The shutter speeds are more recognisable on the iiig as well. I'd love an M camera though, but from what I've gathered they are bigger which really nullifies using a Barnack. With one of the 2 collapsible 5cm's I have it easily fits in my pocket and the 9cm fits in the other. The way it operates slows me down as well. I now have to think about what I'm shooting rather than rattle through pictures on my digital X-Pro2 (which although it great, I'm really annoyed they couldn't include a proper range finder patch). Plus point though is if I fancy taking instant snaps I can mount my Leitz glass on the Fuji and get the glow.

I learnt photography when digital wasn't around and things often come full circle. Now I'm enjoying film again and wishing I hadn't given away all my processing and printing gear.. *sigh*

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

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

[JeongYeobKim]

If I had to pick one, I would settle on the IIIg.

As a new M3 shooter, I was surprised by its large weight and size, compared to the svelte IIIg. It's just easier lugging around the IIIg, shooting it, and then tucking it to my side or back with a cross strap. Although much has been made about the two cameras' viewfinders, instantaneous zone focusing--for me--neutralized the M3's seeming advantage in optics (although I really love the 0.92× magnification, with both eyes open I'm pretty good at estimating 35mm frame lines). Regarding lenses, the M3 has the clear advantage, but once I loaded up with my preferred 50 and 90 LTMs (Heliar f/3.5 and Elmar f/4), and saving to purchase the LLL 35mm f/2 LTM (while also having options with both new and vintage lenses), this area isn't too bad for the IIIg.

Still, I'm having fun with my newly acquired M3. I love its metal chunkiness and dense heft; the large, bright finder; and the fun of swapping in LTM lenses with an adapter. Leica ownership--especially its film cameras--is just too much fun

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[ejg1890]

20 hours ago, JeongYeobKim said:

If I had to pick one, I would settle on the IIIg.

As a new M3 shooter, I was surprised by its large weight and size, compared to the svelte IIIg. It's just easier lugging around the IIIg, shooting it, and then tucking it to my side or back with a cross strap. Although much has been made about the two cameras' viewfinders, instantaneous zone focusing--for me--neutralized the M3's seeming advantage in optics (although I really love the 0.92× magnification, with both eyes open I'm pretty good at estimating 35mm frame lines). Regarding lenses, the M3 has the clear advantage, but once I loaded up with my preferred 50 and 90 LTMs (Heliar f/3.5 and Elmar f/4), and saving to purchase the LLL 35mm f/2 LTM (while also having options with both new and vintage lenses), this area isn't too bad for the IIIg.

Curious how you feel about cutting film to fit the iiig?  Do you cut as you load the film or pre-cut a number of rolls at a time?

[LocalHero1953]

4 hours ago, ejg1890 said:

Curious how you feel about cutting film to fit the iiig?  Do you cut as you load the film or pre-cut a number of rolls at a time?

I do both, but since starting bulk loading of FILCA cassettes, I have cut all the rolls at once. I don't bother with a template, but cut by eye over a measured 10cm length of leader. 

[Anbaric]

9 hours ago, ejg1890 said:

Curious how you feel about cutting film to fit the iiig?  Do you cut as you load the film or pre-cut a number of rolls at a time?

It's easier to have a couple of films prepared, so why not cut in advance unless you aren't certain what camera you want to use them with? I also use scissors but count sprocket holes rather than measure, leaving 23 unpaired as in the IIIf manual (which is probably overkill), taking care to cut between rather than across holes at the corner, and rounding off rather than leaving a right angle. If I need to do it just before use, I usually have a keyring multitool with scissors like the Leatherham Micra in my pocket.

The IIIg is an interesting choice of camera, perhaps one to buy just because you like it rather than for some logical reason. In a way if falls between two stools. An M is more versatile, because you can use both ranges of lenses if you have adapters, most people find the combined RF/VF more convenient, and you don't need to cut the film. If you want a smaller camera, the other LTMs are more compact and mostly cheaper than the IIIg, and its nice viewfinder doesn't help if you use anything wider than a 50mm lens. But it's also the most advanced LTM camera with a particular appeal of its own, in the eyes of some the most attractive Leica of all. At one point, the IIIg went for about the same price as an M2 or M3 (it's a less common camera than either), but M prices have shot up since then.

[ejg1890]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

26 minutes ago, Anbaric said:

The IIIg is an interesting choice of camera, perhaps one to buy just because you like it rather than for some logical reason.

You mentioned the iiig is an interesting camera to buy, also the iiif.  Have you used both? What is the difference? I understand the iiig is a larger view/range finder. Any other major differences?  I do have an M2 and enjoy shooting with it.  

[Anbaric]

1 minute ago, ejg1890 said:

You mentioned the iiig is an interesting camera to buy, also the iiif.  Have you used both? What is the difference? I understand the iiig is a larger view/range finder. Any other major differences?  I do have an M2 and enjoy shooting with it.  

I mentioned the IIIf manual as I think it has particularly clear loading instructions for the LTM cameras:

https://www.cameramanuals.org/leica_pdf/leica_if_iif_iiif.pdf

The closest thing I have to the IIIf is the IIIc, which lacks flash sync and the film speed reminder, but is otherwise very similar. The IIIg is a taller camera, enough of a difference to make it rather less pocketable (a IIIf or earlier with a collapsible lens, especially the Elmar, can be carried around in a jacket pocket, though it's a little heavy). I carry the IIIg like an M, with a neck strap (actually a half case with a strap at the moment). Like the other LTM cameras, the IIIg has separate viewfinder and rangefinder eyepieces. From the IIIb onwards, these eyepieces are adjacent to each other (they are more widely separated in the IIIa and earlier). The rangefinder is similar in all these cameras, but the IIIg viewfinder is quite different to any other model, bigger and with parallax-corrected framelines for 50mm and 90mm (the others have no framelines at all, and are only for 50mm). This added complexity can make the camera more expensive to service (some technicians have a separate rate for the IIIg). As well as the viewfinder, all IIIg bodies have self-timers (only some IIIf cameras do, and the ultra-rare IIId). The IIIg has an M-style film speed reminder disc on the back (the reminder is built in to the film advance knob on the IIIf, and is absent from the other III-series cameras). The IIIf has a flash sync dial with different settings for the various flashbulbs of the time (the IIIg, like the M cameras, does away with this). The IIIg is the only III-series camera with the complete modern progression of shutter speeds, like 250 and 125 rather than 200 and 100. The standard IIIg ER case is closer to the M style than previous LTM cases, with a window for the film speed reminder and a detachable upper section so you can use it as a half case without the top dangling.

[Doug A]

I have a IIIg and several earlier Barnacks. If I am going out with both a 50mm and an 85mm or 90mm lens I prefer the IIIg to avoid messing with an external viewfinder. If I am taking only a 50mm lens I prefer a IIIf or a IIIc with an SBOOI external 50mm viewfinder. It gives me 1:1 viewing with both eyes open, something no other Leica viewfinder, M or LTM, can do. 

I also had several M Leicas but found I preferred using the Barnacks. I bulk load exclusively, using FILCA cassettes, and keeping an ABLON template and Stanley utility knife in the drawer with the bulk loading gear. I don't find trimming the long tails adds appreciably to the time the job takes. 

Edited June 20, 2022 by Doug A

[JeongYeobKim]

15 hours ago, ejg1890 said:

Curious how you feel about cutting film to fit the iiig?  Do you cut as you load the film or pre-cut a number of rolls at a time?

I cut as I load but keep a scissor in my bag (I've cut and loaded in the field, not too bad but worry about light leaks). I'm working on a personal project so shooting only ORWO N75; although it's easier/faster to load the M3 with ORWO, I'm more satisfied with loading the IIIg as it takes experience to load it correctly and consistently. Obviously the M3 is purely mechanical but the IIIg even more so, and I love it! Kinda like mastering a five-speed but adding rev matching to your skill set. Would love to shoot a Leica 0 series one day!

[Anbaric]

3 hours ago, Doug A said:

I have a IIIg and several earlier Barnacks. If I am going out with both a 50mm and an 85mm or 90mm lens I prefer the IIIg to avoid messing with an external viewfinder. If I am taking only a 50mm lens I prefer a IIIf or a IIIc with an SBOOI external 50mm viewfinder. It gives me 1:1 viewing with both eyes open, something no other Leica viewfinder, M or LTM, can do. 

I also had several M Leicas but found I preferred using the Barnacks. I bulk load exclusively, using FILCA cassettes, and keeping an ABLON template and Stanley utility knife in the drawer with the bulk loading gear. I don't find trimming the long tails adds appreciably to the time the job takes. 

Both the 50mm SBOOI and the 90mm SGVOO are excellent, better than the IIIg VF and its framelines except for the lack of automatic parallax correction. The SGVOO has manual correction, but not the SBOOI.

[Doug A]

44 minutes ago, Anbaric said:

Both the 50mm SBOOI and the 90mm SGVOO are excellent, better than the IIIg VF and its framelines except for the lack of automatic parallax correction. The SGVOO has manual correction, but not the SBOOI.

I have an SGOOD (the 8.5cm equivalent of the SGVOO) VF. I use it and the 90mm marks in the IIIg VF interchangeably with my 85mm and 90mm lenses, but switching between 50mm and 85mm viewfinders in the field is a complication I don't need if I take the IIIg.

[JeongYeobKim]

On 6/18/2022 at 11:11 PM, JeongYeobKim said:

If I had to pick one, I would settle on the IIIg.

As a new M3 shooter, I was surprised by its large weight and size, compared to the svelte IIIg. It's just easier lugging around the IIIg, shooting it, and then tucking it to my side or back with a cross strap. Although much has been made about the two cameras' viewfinders, instantaneous zone focusing--for me--neutralized the M3's seeming advantage in optics (although I really love the 0.92× magnification, with both eyes open I'm pretty good at estimating 35mm frame lines). Regarding lenses, the M3 has the clear advantage, but once I loaded up with my preferred 50 and 90 LTMs (Heliar f/3.5 and Elmar f/4), and saving to purchase the LLL 35mm f/2 LTM (while also having options with both new and vintage lenses), this area isn't too bad for the IIIg.

Still, I'm having fun with my newly acquired M3. I love its metal chunkiness and dense heft; the large, bright finder; and the fun of swapping in LTM lenses with an adapter. Leica ownership--especially its film cameras--is just too much fun

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

I didn't want to edit my original post but add to it, so here it goes:

Since I wrote my original post, I shot my IIIg and M3 on the same weekend while pursuing my personal project, which includes a mix of street photography, portraits and landscapes all on Hollywood Boulevard. Hands down, the IIIg beats the M3.

Focusing: the 1.5x magnified rangefinder on the IIIg, along with a recent CLA, makes critical focusing a pleasure

[JeongYeobKim]

☝️accidentally posted the above post before I had a chance to edit. Continuing...

Presence: because of the IIIg's diminutive size, people appear to be less intimidated or rattled when I ask for their portraits or snap away à la street photography. With the M3, I think that because of its larger size, along with the fact you can practically feel its tank-like build and heft, people in higher proportion have said, "No," to me when I've asked to take their portraits.

Discreetness: I don't like to stick out too much when shooting, so I generally shoot early in the morning so I can wear a jacket to hide my IIIg (I use a cross strap to sling my IIIg to my side or back when not in use), but with the M3, I feel like I stick out even more when I try to hide it under my jacket.

Modern Lenses: you often hear that the IIIg is limited in its choice of modern lenses, but with Voigtlander and other Asian companies rushing in to provide niche Leica screw-mount lenses, I personally believe it's never been a greater time for IIIg owners to acquire and shoot modern glass.

Fun Factor: I loved to shoot and play with my M3 when it first arrived (still do), but over time, I keep going back to the IIIg because of its outright mechanical nature; more than the M3, the IIIg has an addictive sensual quality, from the focusing and composition to its tactile film advancement, I feel attuned to its subtle nuances as a reliable and precise machine. No different than a hunter with his favorite rife, or a Porsche driver with an air-cooled five speed.

It Works: best of all, the IIIg, with all of it positives, has the most important quality of all: it's a great shooter's camera. Yes, in many times the M3 was the faster camera, or easier to handle when dark, or faster to load, but in the times and places I shoot, it's a wonderfully reliable and fun tool to record light.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited June 24, 2022 by JeongYeobKim
Wrong image sizes.

[Mr.Prime]

It’s been a couple of years now and I still have both the iii and M3 and both get use. The M3 gets more use since investing in Lux glass and ease of use whilst wearing glasses, but I recently took out the iii with the original Elmar 50/3.5 and a roll of Portra 400 which I found enjoyable to use when there was plenty of light - the smaller weight of the iii with the Elmar is very nice.

Edited June 26, 2022 by Mr.Prime

[sblitz]

Here's a shot with a iiiF and the Elmar 50/3.5 using Ektachrome. Camera works fine for me. A bit slow,  but sometimes that's okay.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[qqphot]

I have both an M3 and a IIIg. I find I use the IIIg somewhat more, because it's lighter and more compact. I rarely shoot longer than 50mm and never 135, so from the point of view of framelines neither has an advantage; and neither can do wider lenses without an external finder. I don't have any ultra-expensive M glass, I just use an old Summicron on both, or a Summaron and SBLOO. Plus a bunch of different Voigtlander screwmount lenses that can go on either camera.   I don't really use fast lenses on either camera either, because it's impossible to keep the camera adjusted to focus accurately on more than a couple of them at any one time.

[Gerard J.]

The lllf was not made in 1935, that was the year that Leitz started to produce the llla, until 1939 (mine is from that year). The Leica lllf was produced between 1950 and 1957.