M3 or M4-2

[Sara Rice]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am brand new to Leica but not new to film cameras. I shoot professionally with my Hasselblad 503cx in studio and a Nikon F6 for boxing work. I was using a Nikon FE for street work and a M4-2 was offered to me to try out for a few weeks. I am amazed with the results on black and white film and love the weight of the camera. The shutter is smooth an oh so quiet. I like the rangefinder system as well. So, in doing my research and speaking with a few other pro's out there, it was suggested that I would be better with the M3. I have read through the M3 vs M4-2 but honestly, just as confused. I found a list somewhere online that did the pros and cons and breakdowns of all the features on the M's. Again, still don't have an answer that I am comfortable with. 

I am not looking for a Leica just to collect as I pretty much shoot daily with my 35mm.  My F6 is for a specific purpose but maybe some of the boxing work can handle a Leica?

Anyway, would appreciate any input (M3 or M4-2) or suggestion of where is the best to purchase. I hesitate buying it on eBay given the price tag and the unknown factor.

Thank you.

Sara

[jakontil]

To start off, m3 is more suited with a 50mm focal length due to its viewfinder

[Advertisement]

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

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Sara,

Welcome to the Forum.

Most "M" model cameras are similar & can be used in a similar manner in many situations. Both film & digital. And most of the lenses work equally well on both without any adaptation

The Number following the "M" is a designation of features. The numbers have not always been chronological. This pertains to both the film cameras & to the digital cameras.

The only "M" camera that looks somewhat different is the "M5". Which, keeping in mind the "looks": Operates pretty much like many other "M" cameras.

In many situations all "M" cameras will operate pretty much the same, both film & digital. And they will often produce pretty much the same results.

An M3 is chronologically the first "M" camera produced. It has had a number of internal changes during its production from 1954 to 1967. Like a Hasselblad 500C, has had a number of improvements/changes over its lifetime.

An M3 has a different range/viewfinder system than all of the other "M" cameras.

The M3 range/viewfinder system, with a magnification of 0.91X. is designed around a 90mm lens. This means: 50mm & 135mm lenses focus & view very nicely. Usually better than in other "M" cameras. 90mm lenses focus & view even better. The M3 has frame lines for 50mm, 90mm & 135mm lenses. There are additional viewfinders, devices, etc. to use longer & shorter lenses.

Other "M" cameras have range/viewfinders that are designed around a 50mm lens. This means that 35mm & 90mm lenses focus & view very nicely. And 50mm lenses focus & view better than 35mm & 90mm. And about as well as with an M3, but in a different context. Because the M3 50mm frame fills the range/viewfinder with a 0.91X image. While the other "M" cameras have a 50mm frame (Generally)  which is inside a lower magnification, 0.72X, range/viewfinder. The other "M" cameras, also usually with 0.72X, range/viewfinders, all have frames for 35mm, 50mm & 90mm lenses. Some also have frames for 28mm, 75mm & 135mm lenses. There are additional viewfinders, devices, etc. to use longer & shorter lenses.

I wrote (Generally) because you will find that Leitz/Leica sometimes has any number of exceptions/additions/etc. And, sometimes not.

An M4-2 has frames for 35mm, 50mm, 90mm & 135mm lenses. All at 0.72X magnification.

It will work pretty much like all of the other "M" film cameras. Altho some people might write "this" or "that about it. We can deal with those issues later.

Please keep in mind: ALL "M" cameras are good cameras. Some may be considered to be better at "this" or at "that" by some people. Most will take most or all of the lenses going back to around 1931.

We can write back & forth about more of this in more detail as you ask more questions.

This will hopefully be enough for a start.

Best Regards,

Michael

 

Edited September 18, 2023 by Michael Geschlecht

[Greenhilltony]

Both properly CLA’d, an M3 should be more satisfying in handling, smoothness and quietness. When it comes to the viewfinder, the 0.91x one on M3, is indeed amazing and incomparable. However, if you shoot more with 35mm, then the M3 viewfinder does not have adequate space to show 35mm framelines, due to the near 1:1 magnification rate.

Workarounds of using 35mm on M3 are:

1. Buy a goggled 35mm lens, e.g. 35/2 8-element, 35/2.8, 35/3.5. The goggle will shrink the viewfinder into the 0.72x magnification, so you can compose within the original 50mm lines. The potential issue with this solution is about budget and limited selections of lenses, excluding any later Leica 35mm lenses and other excellent third-party 35mm lenses. Also, as these are old lenses, they might suffer from various condition issues, including hazy elements, aperture leaf oil leakage, element separation, damaged coating etc., if you are looking for deal on eBay or so, that might be very troublesome.
2. Guesstimate the FOV of 35mm with your experience. Shooting from hip for quick snaps, or look deep into the viewfinder, eyeballing the corners of the M3 viewfinder, to have an approximate framing area of 35mm FOV. I am currently using this method when I use the Light Lens Lab 35/2 8E replica on M3, because I’m confident I can do it, to enjoy the focusing experience of M3 viewfinder but bear with the quirks.
3. Buy a goggled lens, detach the goggle, DIY a way to fix it on the body. For example, add a linkage one end to the goggle and the other end fixed by sliding into the cold shoe, or the flash/bulb plugs.
4. Use an external viewfinder. I don’t like this, because the cold shoe is quite close to the viewfinder; when I put my right eye on the cold shoe mounted finder, my nose is really close to the body viewfinder, sweat, oil, and breath will fog the viewfinder and make it dirty.

40mm lens, on the other hand, is easier to use on M3 without any accessories. Just use the room out of the 50mm framelines. Though some would disagree, claiming the lines are too thick and annoying, it does work. I compare the experience of using whole viewfinder of M3 to the exact photos taken with 40mm lens+M10-P. The coverages are quite similar, on M3 you may need to look to the right for a little bit more if you care.

Okay, when you don’t want to mess with all these things, just want to try a 35 on a Leica M, I’d recommend M2 or M4 rather than M4-2. They were better built than M4-2. M4-2 was produced during the hardest time of Leica, so it has a lot of cost-cutting measures in productions leading to higher rates of failure reports and necessities to have CLA.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Again Sara,

I forgot to add: SOME "M" cameras (Not all.) have behind the lens meters beginning with the M5 in 1971. The M4-2, which began production in 1977, does NOT have a behind the lens meter. Some later metered models have behind the lens flash metering also.

Explaining "M" cameras can be complex.

Hello Greenhilltony,

Welcome to the Forum.

If you remove fixed goggles from 35mm lenses: They will NOT focus accurately using the range/viewfinder of any "M" camera.

"Goggled" 35mm lenses, with their "goggles" intact, either fit, or can be adjusted to fit, many "M" models. The "goggles" allow a person to view, focus & frame, all at the same time, inside the range/viewfinder. "Goggled" 35 mm lenses, were designed to expand the view inside the M3 range/viewfinder to show the angle of view of a 35mm lens in a 50mm viewfinder.

The "goggles" will show the image of a 35mm lens in the 50mm frame of other "M" viewfinder cameras.

Best Regards Both,

Michael

Edited September 18, 2023 by Michael Geschlecht

[dpitt]

I am surprised nobody mentioned a good source of information about M camera's so that you can make your mind up yourself:

https://wiki.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Main_Page#Film_M

https://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/#m

Basically the Leica M era started with the M3 (1954), which was and still is a giant leap forward compared to the Leica rangefinder systems before that (they are called Barnack camera's or LTM)

The M3 introduced the viewfinder you liked about the M4-2 that you have used. Its viewfinder was made for use with 50mm lenses in the first place. It's 0.91 magnification is ideal because it allows you to shoot with both eyes open without issues. It has 50/90/135 mm framelines. It is not ideal for wider lenses, and unfortunately the 35mm FL was gaining popularity in the 50's. Leica quickly develeoped the M2 as a slimmed down (cheaper) version with 35/50/90 for people who prefer 35mm. To allow that they had to reduce magnification to 0.72 which has become the standard for all film M camera's from then on. Digital M's have 0.68 magnification which allows for better 28mm frames. The M2 proved to be a big hit and is now almost as much appreciated as the M3.

Over the years Leica introduced other framelines and magnifications. See the wiki page link above for a nice overview.

An other quirk of the M3 is that the early models were double stroke (DS), Leica thought it would reduce strain on the film if it was advanced bij stroking the advance lever 2 times to advance one frame. After a few years it became single stroke (SS) as all other film M and film SLR's have now. It is something you get used to.

The rewind mechanism of the M4-2 is easier in my opinion and faster with the rewind crank compared to the thumb wheel of the M3. If you have to rewind outside in the cold, your fingers can get painfully strained. Some extra crank accessories are available to help with that, but it is just built in from the M4 on.

The first M with a built in meter is the M5. This model was not very popular, but is gaining appreciation lately. It introduced lots of improvements but in the end it was too expensive to produce. And it was too heavy and 'large' according to many Leica fan's. Leica quickly introduced the M4-2 to get back in profit. With the classic M6, which is the most popular model today, Leica was back to the old form factor of the M4, but with a built in meter. After that the M7 came out as the only film M with aperture priority mode.

They recently introduced a brand new copy of the M6 next to their M-A and MP models.

Any M, provided in good condition will be a great camera to use. Decide with which FL of lens(es) you want to use and then decide what will be the best fit for you.

Edited September 18, 2023 by dpitt

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi, Sara!

One thing to keep in mind is this is a very eclectic forum, with history buffs, gear buffs, snapshooting buffs, working pros, and artists (and every combination thereof - those are NOT mutually-exclusive categories).  So you may need to filter the responses for what applies to what you care about, and want to use and do.

Personally I was never attracted to the M3 (and wider-angle, simplified M2), and preferred the M4-2 (my own first M camera that "lasted" - and also a replacement to an FM2).

The M3/2 have a very fiddly loading system - the take-up spool has to be removed from the camera, and the film attached to it, and then the entire cassette/film/spool assembly fed back into the camera bottom. Kinda needs three hands. As a working pro, that was just "too much history" to deal with.  

But on the other hand, the M3/2/4 are very beautifully-crafted jewel-like works of German mechanical engineering and art.

The M4-2 was made in Canada, and was a conscious attempt to reduce costs, at a time (1977) when the SLR ruled the market, and Leitz actually consider dropping the rangefinder cameras altogether, as unprofitable. Some consider it a bit rough and "industrial" compared to the silky-smooth hand-polished 1950s-60s German-built Leicas. But it does have a much-more practical almost-auto loading system and rewind crank introduced with the M4 (original) ten years earlier. And is about as light-weight as M cameras get, since Leitz also deleted the clockwork self-timer mechanism to save money.

Again personally, I love "industrial chic," so that made the M4-2 even better for me.   And as an aside, the Canadian M4-P(rofessional) is essentially an M4-2 with added viewfinder frames for 28 and 75mm lenses. And an M6 is effectively the M4-P with a meter added. Just in case you find it hard to track an M4-2 specifically.

Neither the M4-2 or M3 have a built-in light meter, which also saves a few grams, but will require figuring out some other way to meter things that are not in daylight (where one can memorize simple rules for exposure -"Sunny f/16" and similar).

Where to buy: Without excluding many other possible sources worldwide, I have had really good success with the following online U.S. used-Leica shops (at roughly-decreasing price points). Maybe a couple of foul-ups over 25 years - all quickly rectified. And with store warranties and reasonable return windows.

Leica Store Miami; Tamarkin Photo (Chicago), and KEH (Atlanta). Google can find all of them.

If none of them have what I'm looking for, I generally just wait until they do.

[earleygallery]

You want an M2, best Leica M with a 35mm lens!

 

[Anbaric]

On 9/18/2023 at 12:49 AM, Sara Rice said:

I am brand new to Leica but not new to film cameras. I shoot professionally with my Hasselblad 503cx in studio and a Nikon F6 for boxing work. I was using a Nikon FE for street work and a M4-2 was offered to me to try out for a few weeks. I am amazed with the results on black and white film and love the weight of the camera. The shutter is smooth an oh so quiet. I like the rangefinder system as well. So, in doing my research and speaking with a few other pro's out there, it was suggested that I would be better with the M3. I have read through the M3 vs M4-2 but honestly, just as confused. I found a list somewhere online that did the pros and cons and breakdowns of all the features on the M's. Again, still don't have an answer that I am comfortable with.

If it was a straight choice between those two as my only Leica, and I was buying it to use rather than appreciate the engineering, I'd get the M4-2. I wouldn't want to be without the 35mm frameline that the M3 lacks, because I probably use a 35mm lens more than any other, and I wouldn't want to be restricted to vintage goggled 35mm lenses, or have to use external viewfinders, or guesstimate the framing.

There are other cameras you might consider. The M2 is a lot like the M3, but swaps the M3's 50/90/135 framelines for 35/50/90, which to me is much more useful (I think your Nikons are better suited to longer lenses). The M2 has a frame counter you have to reset manually, and some of them have a button you have to push in when rewinding rather than flicking a lever, but these are minor inconveniences. Both the M2 and the M3 are slower to load than later Leicas, though you can now get a third party gadget that converts them to rapid loading.

The M4 brought some new innovations - rapid film loading as standard, a fast rewind crank you'll appreciate if you need to change films in a hurry, and a new articulated wind-on lever. The M4 combines all the framelines from the previous models (35/50/90/135), with the 35 and 135 shown together. The M4-2 is similar, a return to the older design after the larger M5 didn't sell very well, though the original M4 is generally reckoned to be better made like the M2 and M3 were (though it's all relative - all Leica film cameras are very well made). At some point during the M4-2 production run, they removed a condenser lens from the rangefinder, which makes the RF patch more likely to flare and 'white out' in certain lighting conditions, which continued to be an issue until they restored it in the MP and later cameras. The M4-P has more framelines than the M4 or M4-2, giving you the full set of 28/35/50/90/135. If you use either of these additional focal lengths you might consider this, or go for the M6, which has the same framelines and adds a light meter. If you don't, you might prefer an older model - to get all the framelines in, two of them always have to be shown at once (which some people find cluttered), and they seem to have shrunk the 50mm frameline a bit (this frameline is now reckoned to be accurate close up, but rather undersized for more distant shots).

[Sara Rice]

Thank you all who are responding. I appreciate all the input. Reading these responses and learning new material has really been informative and so helpful. I am going to go with the M4-2 and get a 50mm, newer model lens...it's about the glass, right? That M4-2 that I playing with has a 35mm Voitlander lens on it so for now I will have that. I am getting the hang of loading the film and testing it out. I made contact sheets the other day from the first roll I have been testing and I like the look for sure. Thank you!!!!

 

[Sandokan]

I was going to suggest, if you have tried and enjoyed the M4-2, get that  You also came to the same conclusion, so enjoy it. 

Please dont ask "which 50mm should i get" ... unless you want 100 opinions  

If you liked 35mm and the Voigtlander, then get that. Voigtlander make good lenses, as do Zeiss if you are not wedded to getting a Leica. 

I always say "try in a shop and buy the one that feels right". Worry about price and performance later. As you probably know with the F6 against F5, how it feels is more important than anyone else's opinion. 

Some of the 50mm f1.4 Aspherical had a region in the 1-2.5m focus range, where they stiffened up. I bought a vintage looking one which was smooth. 

The focus throw of a lens varies from 90 degrees upto 180 deg and this determines if it is fast or accurate. 

As I say - always play with the items and make friends with a good dealer. 

[Sara Rice]

Thank you for your reply. Yes, I went with the M4-2 and I am enjoying it. Took a bit to get the hang of loading it but I think I got that solid now.  I got a new 50mm and it came with the 35mm Voigtlander so got that now as well. Appreciate the comment about the F6 with the F5. Your sentiment is oh so true.

Anyway, thanks again.

Sara