Leica M3, M6 or M7

[Borna]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I also went through this faze. I ended up buying the M6. Although if you are new to film shooting and want the 'easy experience', I would recommend looking at a camera with quick loading the film, forgot the name. Meaning Models M4, M4-P, M4-2, M6 and M7. Not familiar with M5 but probably has it as well? Otherwise someone can correct me. 

The M3 is a bit fiddly, you have to remove the spool and manually add the film to it before attaching the film and the spool in again. 

Edit: In addition, if you really dont mind the light meter and want to use external metering or sunny 16, I think an base silver M4 is very nice model. 

Edited October 16, 2023 by Borna

[Advertisement]

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

[MarkP]

My film Leicas include M7, M3, CL and IIIf.  Love the M3 and IIIf but the M7 is by far the most used of these cameras due to it’s versatility.  

[espelt]

In my experience, the M6 is ideal for beginners. In the beginning, the small light meter really makes a difference. You don't have to fiddle with an additional device, you can just concentrate on the subject. An M6 is also just a bit younger. An M3 is over 60 years old, an M4 is around 50 years old. That doesn't necessarily have to mean anything. Can but...
The M7 is certainly a great and comfortable camera. But it would have too much electronics for me. In the event of a failure or defect, not much can be done. If the battery on the M6 is empty - it continues to work. Fully mechanical.
Depending on your budget, you can also use an MP. It's basically the same.

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!

[hepcat]

15 hours ago, nemendes said:

I was using fujifilm cameras before and everything was auto at that time. Then 5 years ago i took my first leica camera m10, now i have m11. I love shooting from rangefinder, love leica world  but i never try analog film camera before. With m11, i have auto aperture, iso and etc. I took photos with all manuel but even if then, i have chance to check up my frame and take it if it needs.

with analog one, i dont have any chance to check up, so i am afraid to make my composition wrong. And i never use light meter before, i dont have any idea how they work and how much they accurate. As you said, maybe i should go with m7 at least to get used to take analog shoots and try to compose myself time by time.

I have shot Leica cameras since 1974.  I've had an M2, several M3s, several M4 and variants, an M8, M9, and now have an M5 3 lug and an M10-P.

Shooting digital should be no different from shooting film.  The same disciplines apply.  You choose aperture for depth of field, shutter speed for stopping motion, and the lowest film (sensor)  speed (ISO) as is appropriate for your shooting session.   Most often a single meter reading, be it hand-held or in camera, should be satisfactory for a shooting session unless you're in drastically changing light.   I often pre-set the camera, shutter speed, aperture, and focus and let the physics of hyperfocal distance do its thing.
Those steps allow you to completely focus on framing and angle and what's in your shot.   You will, of course, use different settings for different circumstances; one set of adjustments for portraiture, a different set for sports, and yet another for "walking around."   Those should be second nature. 

"Automatic" cameras do those things for you, but only insofar as some programmer thought they should be the "right" settings.  I also have a Panny S1 and S5 that I use primarily with Leitz "R" 2 and 3 cam lenses, and I shoot both of those cameras on manual far more than I allow them to do automation because the camera just doesn't "know" what I have in mind for shutter speed and aperture (DOF) when I frame a shot.

Light meters do a single task:  assign a middle gray (18%) value to whatever you are pointing it at.  It's up to YOU to determine if you in fact want that value to BE middle gray, or you want some OTHER value in the scene to be middle gray.  Most "photographers" have no idea how or why their meter works.  And often times they're disappointed because it chose a highlight to be middle gray dumping the shadows, or it's aimed at a shadow area, assigns that as middle gray, and the highlights are blown.   And the more automation a camera has, particularly with a spot meter, the more likely it is to misidentify what value YOU want middle gray in your photo. 

The bottom line is that you need to learn the discipline(s) of exposing film, apply it to digital so it becomes second nature, and THEN decide what camera will fit your circumstances best.  The BEST camera is one that just gets out of your way and is transparent in the process.  It doesn't sound like your M10 is transparent to you yet if you're chimping every shot.

Good luck!

[spydrxx]

Now having read the replies and responses thus far, I think you're overthinking the issue. Each camera will have its plusses and minuses to learn to deal with, just like anything in life. Whatever you select will have a learning curve accompanying it. I encourage you to go to a dealer, try out several film bodies to see which feels most comfortable for your use and get on with it. You will have to deal with a fixed ISO per roll of film....not a big deal, you can simulate that with your digital body. You will have to learn how the meter measures...the instruction manual will give you some guidance on that. I personally prefer incident measuring, which means a separate hand held meter until you get sunny 16 down pat. Even if you got an M2, M3 or M4 there are (older)  Leica made CdS meters which you can attach, are easy to use, and quickly get a sense of what field the meter is measuring. It isn't rocket science...so I wouldn't worry about it nor composition, you will reasonably quickly develop a sense of what works for you and what you need to learn more about. Procrastination can be an impediment to progress.

[nemendes]

23 hours ago, Greenhilltony said:

Aperture-priority mode for convenience? Mostly it's a fake story. Once you become an experienced photographer, you will doubt the result of the built-in light meter every single time, comparing it against the exposure settings you used to know and proven to be successful. Also, you cannot read the light meter results out of the viewfinder, which means if you're not sure about the suggested shutter speed, you have to raise the camera to your eye––it's quite a mess. Especially, when you want to shoot from the hip, or run & gun, you know nothing about the AE mode's thoughts. You might know, 1/500s at this F-stop is already great for the scene, but then the camera is fooled by some lighter or darker subjects or the reflective light from the surfaces, then the AE mode exposes in a few stops away. So if you have to tame the light meter every time, it will not relieve any effort but instead bother you seriously. 

I didnt think about situation that way, thank you for sharing opinions. I thought that light meter in Leica m7 would make things lot easier for me but as much as I understood, maybe it wouldn't me help at all, even make the process worse. 

[nemendes]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 hours ago, hepcat said:

I have shot Leica cameras since 1974.  I've had an M2, several M3s, several M4 and variants, an M8, M9, and now have an M5 3 lug and an M10-P.

Shooting digital should be no different from shooting film.  The same disciplines apply.  You choose aperture for depth of field, shutter speed for stopping motion, and the lowest film (sensor)  speed (ISO) as is appropriate for your shooting session.   Most often a single meter reading, be it hand-held or in camera, should be satisfactory for a shooting session unless you're in drastically changing light.   I often pre-set the camera, shutter speed, aperture, and focus and let the physics of hyperfocal distance do its thing.
Those steps allow you to completely focus on framing and angle and what's in your shot.   You will, of course, use different settings for different circumstances; one set of adjustments for portraiture, a different set for sports, and yet another for "walking around."   Those should be second nature. 

"Automatic" cameras do those things for you, but only insofar as some programmer thought they should be the "right" settings.  I also have a Panny S1 and S5 that I use primarily with Leitz "R" 2 and 3 cam lenses, and I shoot both of those cameras on manual far more than I allow them to do automation because the camera just doesn't "know" what I have in mind for shutter speed and aperture (DOF) when I frame a shot.

Light meters do a single task:  assign a middle gray (18%) value to whatever you are pointing it at.  It's up to YOU to determine if you in fact want that value to BE middle gray, or you want some OTHER value in the scene to be middle gray.  Most "photographers" have no idea how or why their meter works.  And often times they're disappointed because it chose a highlight to be middle gray dumping the shadows, or it's aimed at a shadow area, assigns that as middle gray, and the highlights are blown.   And the more automation a camera has, particularly with a spot meter, the more likely it is to misidentify what value YOU want middle gray in your photo. 

The bottom line is that you need to learn the discipline(s) of exposing film, apply it to digital so it becomes second nature, and THEN decide what camera will fit your circumstances best.  The BEST camera is one that just gets out of your way and is transparent in the process.  It doesn't sound like your M10 is transparent to you yet if you're chimping every shot.

Good luck!

Thank you very much for your advices. I couldnt be agree more and every word that you said, it's true. 

[nemendes]

17 hours ago, spydrxx said:

Now having read the replies and responses thus far, I think you're overthinking the issue. Each camera will have its plusses and minuses to learn to deal with, just like anything in life. Whatever you select will have a learning curve accompanying it. I encourage you to go to a dealer, try out several film bodies to see which feels most comfortable for your use and get on with it. You will have to deal with a fixed ISO per roll of film....not a big deal, you can simulate that with your digital body. You will have to learn how the meter measures...the instruction manual will give you some guidance on that. I personally prefer incident measuring, which means a separate hand held meter until you get sunny 16 down pat. Even if you got an M2, M3 or M4 there are (older)  Leica made CdS meters which you can attach, are easy to use, and quickly get a sense of what field the meter is measuring. It isn't rocket science...so I wouldn't worry about it nor composition, you will reasonably quickly develop a sense of what works for you and what you need to learn more about. Procrastination can be an impediment to progress.

It's my kind of character that I am overthinking everything a little much  I am just be afraid to choose wrong camera for me but as you said that every camera will have its plusses and minuses, so I just should take the one that I feel myself comfortable to use and start to learn analog photography as much as I could. 

[LocalHero1953]

Well, contrariwise, I find built in reflective lightmeters, aperture priority, and quite a lot of the other auto options are extremely helpful and all that I (and many others) need in order to take good photos i.e. photos that other people find interesting, and that have a chance of lasting (remaining interesting in future). One only has to look around at a few well known photographers to see that a perfectly exposed and focused image is only one possible criterion for good photography.

If I was starting out in photography all over again, and had the self confidence to ignore those wanted me to understand optics before I started, I would use whatever tools technology gave me to look at and record the world around me, trying to forget as much as possible the nuts and bolts of how I'm doing it. Only when I found that my results and enjoyment were limited by my technique would I start to dig more deeply.

YMMV

[LocalHero1953]

FWIW, and to show that a choice made now doesn't mean you're stuck with it for ever, I have just mentally totted up the periods I have used my main camera before finding a replacement. Starting at the age of 9, in years: 3, 5, 5, 4, 2, 3, 12*, 2, 3, 3, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3. So pick a camera, any camera, and get photographing. Then find out for yourself what you want in the next one.

* Leica M2 and and Pentax Mx shot in tandem.

Edited October 17, 2023 by LocalHero1953

[LocalHero1953]

And one more contrariwise comment:

An ability to judge exposure accurately and precisely by eye is not a prerequisite for being a good photographer or getting enjoyment from photography (film or digital). Nor is perfect pitch a requisite for being a good musician or getting enjoyment from performing music.

[nemendes]

4 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

And one more contrariwise comment:

An ability to judge exposure accurately and precisely by eye is not a prerequisite for being a good photographer or getting enjoyment from photography (film or digital). Nor is perfect pitch a requisite for being a good musician or getting enjoyment from performing music.

Thank you for sharing your opinions! I want to know analog world as much as I can but by which time I want to get enjoyment as you said. So, I don't want any hard difficulties to make me get bored and just leave analog camera at home. Of course, I don't have to stuck with one analog camera forever, but as you know Leica world is a little bit salty, so I don't want to spend extra money for buying/selling stuffs when I try to choose suitable camera for my needs  

[Ouroboros]

On 10/15/2023 at 12:38 AM, nemendes said:

….. I am thinking to get one among options m3,m6 and m7. 
 

You could just make a decision on which camera to buy as your teacher, go out and use it and learn from your mistakes.

If you approach your learning period in a structured way by setting yourself a few ‘assignments’ ie thinking about finding or setting up different lighting and contrast scenarios, bracketing exposures and making careful notes of your camera settings and then referencing the outcomes to your notes, you should quickly get a grasp of the cause and effect which is central to understanding how to meter a scene properly.

No one can really advise you on which of the three cameras on your shortlist would be the most suitable, you’ll have to work that one out for yourself.

 If I were really pressed on that, I’d say buy a camera that gives as much viewfinder exposure  information as possible. A Nikon FE, for example, will give you simultaneous aperture and shutter speed feedback on your manual settings to directly compare with the camera ttl meter reading.  That alone is invaluable at the learning stage.

A Nikon FE would be a fraction of the outlay compared to of any of the three Leica M cameras on your shortlist and you won’t lose any money should you decide to sell it later.

Once you’ve mastered the basics of photographing with film, you’ll be better placed to make an informed decision on which film M camera would be most suited to your needs or wants.

 

 

 

[Smudgerer]

1 hour ago, Ouroboros said:

You could just make a decision on which camera to buy as your teacher, go out and use it and learn from your mistakes.

If you approach your learning period in a structured way by setting yourself a few ‘assignments’ ie thinking about finding or setting up different lighting and contrast scenarios, bracketing exposures and making careful notes of your camera settings and then referencing the outcomes to your notes, you should quickly get a grasp of the cause and effect which is central to understanding how to meter a scene properly.

No one can really advise you on which of the three cameras on your shortlist would be the most suitable, you’ll have to work that one out for yourself.

 If I were really pressed on that, I’d say buy a camera that gives as much viewfinder exposure  information as possible. A Nikon FE, for example, will give you simultaneous aperture and shutter speed feedback on your manual settings to directly compare with the camera ttl meter reading.  That alone is invaluable at the learning stage.

A Nikon FE would be a fraction of the outlay compared to of any of the three Leica M cameras on your shortlist and you won’t lose any money should you decide to sell it later.

Once you’ve mastered the basics of photographing with film, you’ll be better placed to make an informed decision on which film M camera would be most suited to your needs or wants.

Sound advice............I agree with this approach. The FE is an excellent camera and it's not just a camera that's only for "beginners" either. A sensible suggestion from Ouroboros to the OP's questions and far less of a hurt to the wallet if they find later that film is not for them.

Edited October 17, 2023 by Smudgerer
grammar

[RayD28]

IMO, scratch the M3 off your list.  It was the first Leica I bought and is a close second to my most used film camera (MP).  It's an outstanding camera for 50mm, my favorite FL, but for 35mm or 28mm you will need an external finder (EF).  I'm disregarding the goggled 35mm since it's practical use is limited to an M3.  I don't use 35mm much but I do 28mm so I use an EF. I don't mind using an EF but they are not cheap and it adds another step when you change lenses, having to both find and attach the EV and then detaching and stowing the EF.  

If you get a metered camera you can always predetermine the exposure and ignore the internal meter.  

[hepcat]

14 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Well, contrariwise, I find built in reflective lightmeters, aperture priority, and quite a lot of the other auto options are extremely helpful and all that I (and many others) need in order to take good photos i.e. photos that other people find interesting, and that have a chance of lasting (remaining interesting in future). One only has to look around at a few well known photographers to see that a perfectly exposed and focused image is only one possible criterion for good photography.

Paul, one of the interesting things about photography and photographers is that we tend to think of our own experience when giving advice.  The problem with that of course is that as photography isn't a one-size-fits-all pursuit, neither is our advice.  You are absolutely correct in your assessment that there have been successful photographs where exposure and focus weren't important at all..  Robert Capa's images come immediately to mind.  But conversely, in the worlds of technical, reportage, and forensic photography (where I grew up as a photographer) they were considered imperatives.   When I was in photo school in 1974, I was initially issued a Speed Graphic, a wooden tripod and a Weston master V.  And you didn't graduate to a Mamiya C330 kit until you'd mastered the basics of exposure, lens board tilt, and of course critical focus along with all of the physics and chemistry that was necessary to be a working photographer in those days.  Along with the basics, of course, we were taught composition, how to calculate exposure from bellows extention, and ultimately how to make proper and sharp exposures without the benefit of metering or worrying about critically focusing each frame.   We were taught to make photographs under the most primitive and difficult conditions, but still provide the images needed.   There was much more that was taught, but you get the picture.   

My point is that when you teach someone to thread a nut onto a bolt, they can be a fine mechanic.  When, however, they learn that a screw is an inclined plane wrapped around a cone that, with the application of rotary torque, is capable of moving a load through space, they can be anything they want.

The beautiful images in your Instagram account are proof positive of your assertions.  Programmed cameras actually do a very nice job of assessing exposure and making proper settings under many conditions and automation is fine for snapshots.   The problem arises when you absolutely MUST get the image, and the circumstances lie outside the ability of the automation to perform.   If you rely on that automation and you don't have the background to know why the automation will fail and how to override the automation to get the image anyway, you've failed.   And that, my friend, has been MY world of photography for the past fifty or so years.   I've come to trust automation under certain circumstances, but I also know where the boundaries of that automation lie.  And then I turn it off and rely on my expertise and training.   And that was both my point, and I believe the point  @Greenhilltony was making as well.

Edited October 17, 2023 by hepcat

[hepcat]

8 minutes ago, hepcat said:

 

Sorry... meant to edit above post and quoted instead...  *sigh*

Edited October 17, 2023 by hepcat

[LocalHero1953]

38 minutes ago, hepcat said:

The beautiful images in your Instagram account are proof positive of your assertions.  Programmed cameras actually do a very nice job of assessing exposure and making proper settings under many conditions and automation is fine for snapshots.   The problem arises when you absolutely MUST get the image, and the circumstances lie outside the ability of the automation to perform.   If you rely on that automation and you don't have the background to know why the automation will fail and how to override the automation to get the image anyway, you've failed.   And that, my friend, has been MY world of photography for the past fifty or so years.   I've come to trust automation under certain circumstances, but I also know where the boundaries of that automation lie.  And then I turn it off and rely on my expertise and training.   And that was both my point, and I believe the point  @Greenhilltony was making as well.

I appreciate your post and have no real problem with it. I came to this subject on the back of a visit a couple of weeks ago to the Daido Moriyama exhibition at The Photographer's Gallery. I have no doubt that he understood the basics of aperture, shutter speed, film speed and depth of focus, but ignoring such technicalities nevertheless gave rise to a body of work that can inspire - and that is a mile away from your technical, reportage and forensic photography, and from my own as well. I also remember my then teenage daughter taking a point and shoot camera away for her first holiday on her own and coming back with photos that I envied.

My point is that enjoyment and the photographer's eye should come first; the technicalities and photographic optics come in only once you become dissatisfied with your progress - learning them shouldn't be a prerequisite to starting out, as sometimes seems to be the advice on offer.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[madNbad]

The OP has the latest digital Leica and wants to try film. I was out today with a recently serviced Kodak Retina 1. Viewfinder, scale focus, cock the shutter for each exposure kind of Retina. I can read the light pretty well but I still metered almost every scene. If the OP really wants to try film, start with something inexpensive and a decent meter. No one starts in photography by wandering out and knowing "Hey! That scene looks like it's would be great if exposed at 5.6 at 1/125th on Tri-X!" They learn by experimentation and learning to read a meter. If a built in meter or AE or any of the other advances in film photography help the user to achieve consistently good exposures and they're happy, great! If someone wants to learn more, even better.

[nemendes]

21 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

You could just make a decision on which camera to buy as your teacher, go out and use it and learn from your mistakes.

If you approach your learning period in a structured way by setting yourself a few ‘assignments’ ie thinking about finding or setting up different lighting and contrast scenarios, bracketing exposures and making careful notes of your camera settings and then referencing the outcomes to your notes, you should quickly get a grasp of the cause and effect which is central to understanding how to meter a scene properly.

No one can really advise you on which of the three cameras on your shortlist would be the most suitable, you’ll have to work that one out for yourself.

 If I were really pressed on that, I’d say buy a camera that gives as much viewfinder exposure  information as possible. A Nikon FE, for example, will give you simultaneous aperture and shutter speed feedback on your manual settings to directly compare with the camera ttl meter reading.  That alone is invaluable at the learning stage.

A Nikon FE would be a fraction of the outlay compared to of any of the three Leica M cameras on your shortlist and you won’t lose any money should you decide to sell it later.

Once you’ve mastered the basics of photographing with film, you’ll be better placed to make an informed decision on which film M camera would be most suited to your needs or wants.

 

 

 

According to your advices, I was looking for information about Nikon fe camera and as you said it can be better choice for me at first. Auto controls, significantly cheaper system and great camera. I think I will try my analog taste at first at that camera and test myself how much I m open to learn and patient about analog photography. Then I think it will be better and easier to choose which Leica is more suitable for my needs. Thank you for your advice.