35mm Voigtlander lens on M3

[Aryel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One thing to consider in favour of the m3 is that it is easier to nail the focus at 1.4 (at least for me) but you’d need an external viewfinder which also adds to the cost. I rarely use my m2 as I like the external viewfinder a lot and my eyesight isn’t that good and benefits from the extra magnification. 

If you get a chance, try both at a dealer then you can decide. 

[nitroplait]

9 hours ago, qqphot said:

I realize the inexpensive options are more variable, but I've also had pretty good luck with them. However I have an Urth 35-135 adapter whose thickness is off by quite a lot, enough to make a difference, and I ended up replacing it with a Rayqual one.

Yeah. One should be prepared for some sample variation with the cheap adapters. Usually it is within the acceptable range but I could have just been lucky in this case.

Rayqual, Novoflex and Voigtlander are likely better (most of mine are from the latter and I have no complaints). 

[Product Details]

Complete Overview 35mm Leica M-Mount Lenses

35 mm F1.2 Nokton (Amazon | B&H) - 35 mm F1.4 Nokton II MC (Amazon | B&H) - 35 mm F1.5 Nokton (Amazon | B&H) - 35 mm F2.0 APO Lanthar (Amazon | B&H) - 35 mm F2.0 Ultron (Amazon) - 35 mm F2.0 Ultron II (Amazon | B&H) - 35 mm F2.5 Color Skopar P-Type (Amazon | B&H)

[wizard]

Everything expressed in the above postings is true, but nobody has mentioned yet that if you want to use 90 or even 135mm lenses, the M3 finder is the best of all M cameras to date. Just sayin ...

Cheers,

Andy

[Nigel Craig]

I think the points have been well made. I don’t expect use anything longer than 75 but I do want 35 as standard so that rules out the M3. I should say I need quite strong reading glasses so with vintage cameras where I can’t adjust the diopter of the viewfinder I rely on the DoF scale on the lens. Until I got the IIIa I hadn’t used a rangefinder for at least 50 years but even with its tiny viewfinder and rangefinder there is an advantage over reflex cameras. I don’t really know whether I should go for M2 or M4 (original) as I’m unlikely to have an opportunity to handle before purchasing. The  manual frame counter on the M2 is a non issue for me and I don’t believe there is much difference in film loading; probably comes down to best condition for the money.

[Anbaric]

The M2 and M3 are a bit more fiddly and slower to load than the later cameras. You remove the take up spool as with your IIIa and slot in the leader, but there's no need to trim and the hinged back makes it easier to check the sprockets are engaged. The M4 and later have the modern system, with a captive take up spool that's designed so that you just have to draw out the film to the right length, drop it in, and check the sprocket engagement. The M4/5/6/7 have a canted rewind crank which is faster to use, while the M2 and M3 have a rewind knob more like your IIIa (and the deliberately retro MP and MA). There are lots of YouTube videos if you want to check how the various systems work. Some M2 and M3 bodies might come fitted with the 'quick load kit', a replacement take up spool that is supposedly a bit faster to use, but which not everyone prefers. If bought separately as an accessory, it tends to go for silly prices.

[gyoung]

On 6/30/2022 at 4:43 PM, TomB_tx said:

When I bought a Leica M in 1968 the M3 was still available new for the same price as the new M4. The dealer let me compare finders with 35, 50 & 90 lenses, and I much preferred the M4, as 90 was still very usable, and I expected to use 35 a lot. (Actually bought a 90 first for use with the M4.) These days I have M2, M3, M4, M5 & M6, and the M3 is my least favorite, as the finder always shows the heavy 50mm frame lines no matter what lens is used (along with a 90 or 135 frame for those lenses). In use I find nothing more special about the M3, but if you always wanted one, go for it, or you'll still get one eventually!

68 was a good year!  I bought an M3 (new) in preference to the M2 or 4, I couldnt easily see the 35 frame in the 2 and 4 with my glasses, and I liked the larger mag.  Also wanted occasional use of 135.  Still have it and the goggled 35 Summicron I bought at the same time.

Gerry