tofsla Posted May 12, 2009 Share #1 Posted May 12, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, i am happy owner and user of IIIf RD. I am wonder how much IIIg is better and should i get one? Its look a bit bigger, and much much more expensive, but is it much better? Thank you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 12, 2009 Posted May 12, 2009 Hi tofsla, Take a look here Whats next after IIIf. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
andybarton Posted May 12, 2009 Share #2 Posted May 12, 2009 The IIIg uses a rangefinder much like an M Whether you see that as a benefit is something that only you can decide. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted May 12, 2009 Share #3 Posted May 12, 2009 Hi, i am happy owner and user of IIIf RD. I am wonder how much IIIg is better and should i get one? Its look a bit bigger, and much much more expensive, but is it much better? Thank you In USER terms, imho the price difference for a IIIG isn't justified : the finder is better, but unless you use a lot a 90mm, the advantage is not so great. In collector's term, the IIIG is really more interesting than IIIf, but for users, one must keep in mind that for the same price about one can buy, for instance, a good M2 (or, depending on conditions, even a M4) which is definitely a quantum leap in usability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted May 12, 2009 Share #4 Posted May 12, 2009 Andy, the lllg rangefinder is the same as the lllf i.e. it has a separate viewfinder, unlike the 'coupled' rangefinder/viewfinder in the M cameras. To answer the OP, the lllf has a better viewfinder (frames for 50mm and 90mm and paralax correction) but that's about it. What is it that you find your lllf lacks that you think the lllg would give you? I use a lllf and an M2 - I bought the M2 specifically to use with a 35mm lens for street photography as I didn't want to use a separate viewfinder. I use a 25mm (zone focus) lens and 5cm Elmar on the lllf mostly. If the issue for you is the viewfinder, then an M would be a better camera for you (to use alongside the lllf - don't sell it!). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tofsla Posted May 12, 2009 Author Share #5 Posted May 12, 2009 Thank you for reply.. I guess I should be more clear that I already have M7 and M8, and I use to own M3 and M6 but sold it when upgraded myself to M7 . I like IIIf much more then any non digital M and if I want to shot film I never use M7, always IIIf, is so much smaller then any M (including M8, thats just HUGE). its true pocket camera. But I wish, focusing would be a bit easy... and viewfinder will be a bit more like M. I.e. I am looking for IIIf form factor but for camera with M viewfinder/rangfinder - this why I am thinking about IIIg. I hope its makes sense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted May 12, 2009 Share #6 Posted May 12, 2009 Apologies. I understood that the IIIg viewfinder was coupled in a similar way to the Ms. I am sure this is what the man in Lewis's told me when I was looking for one a year or so ago... It is certainly a much bigger viewfinder than in earlier III models. Live and learn Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted May 12, 2009 Share #7 Posted May 12, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thank you for reply.. I guess I should be more clear that I already have M7 and M8, and I use to own M3 and M6 but sold it when upgraded myself to M7 . I like IIIf much more then any non digital M and if I want to shot film I never use M7, always IIIf, is so much smaller then any M (including M8, thats just HUGE). its true pocket camera. But I wish, focusing would be a bit easy... and viewfinder will be a bit more like M. I.e. I am looking for IIIf form factor but for camera with M viewfinder/rangfinder - this why I am thinking about IIIg. I hope its makes sense. Ok, if you are accustomed to Ms RF, IIIG's one is undoubtly better than IIIf's... but..beware ! IIIG is also BIGGER than IIIf... ... the compactness of a "Barnack" with Elmar collapsible is unbeatable (only Leica CL is comparable... but it's a different taste... ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederics Posted May 12, 2009 Share #8 Posted May 12, 2009 I agree with Luigi. IIIF form factor is much better. I had a IIIG & sold it, prefering to use an M camera or a IIIF depending on what I'm doing. The IIIG is a bad compromise, neither fish nor fowl if you will! Save your money:) If you want another screwmount leica, go for the IIF; it's even smaller than the IIIF:) Cheers, Frederic Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tofsla Posted May 13, 2009 Author Share #9 Posted May 13, 2009 Lugi/Frederic... Thank you for replies. I am going to look at IIIg this weekend. If its so much bigger then IIIf i will not go for it. Size/Ergonomic is very important in this case. I don't want bigger camera - i have M7/M8 if i need monster ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
poynterama Posted May 13, 2009 Share #10 Posted May 13, 2009 Nothing wrong with the CL if it does happen to be your taste Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted May 13, 2009 Share #11 Posted May 13, 2009 Let me make a different suggestion... I started my LTM adventures with a IIIc. After about a year I also acquired a II. I sold the IIIc on a few months later. The II is (slightly) smaller, and lacks the slow shutter speeds (which I never used anyway). The main usability difference, for me, however, was that the range- and viewfinder windows are further apart - something I found made them easier and more positive to use. After a CLA by CRR I found this a much more positive and enjoyable experience than the closely-mounted equivalents on the IIIc. I love using my II because it is pretty well the bare-bones minimum of a rangefinder Leica - which, ironically, was upgraded in 1934 from a I anyway. Give it a thought, or maybe a try - you may be surprised. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tofsla Posted May 13, 2009 Author Share #12 Posted May 13, 2009 Bill, I will try it out. I want SMALL camera... so II sounds like interesting option. Thanks for the idea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted May 13, 2009 Share #13 Posted May 13, 2009 You're welcome... ...you won't regret it Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
echorec Posted May 13, 2009 Share #14 Posted May 13, 2009 Hello, I have most of the Barnack models and I highly recommend the IIIg. Not that much larger than IIIf and a joy to use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted May 13, 2009 Share #15 Posted May 13, 2009 Bill, I have to say that plastic accessory shoe protector piece looks SO out of place on your lovely camera . Regards, Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted May 13, 2009 Share #16 Posted May 13, 2009 Bill, I have to say that plastic accessory shoe protector piece looks SO out of place on your lovely camera . Regards, Andy Well spotted, Andy, although it is of course a Minox item - whom Leica owned at one point It serves a practical purpose too - I put it on when I got fed up with snagging the hotshoe time after time when trying to pull the camera out of a particular pocket on a particular jacket. Ironically, other than the film canister, it is the only piece of plastic in the whole camera... Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe D. Posted May 13, 2009 Share #17 Posted May 13, 2009 Hi, I am wonder how much IIIg is better and should i get one? If You're happy with those old cameras, have a look at a Canon IVSB2 instead. Well, it's a kind of sacrilege here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted May 13, 2009 Share #18 Posted May 13, 2009 I put it on when I got fed up with snagging the hotshoe time after time when trying to pull the camera out of a particular pocket on a particular jacket. Bill, that's what I thought was the reason you put it on in the first place. I know exactly what you mean. Ironically, other than the film canister, it is the only piece of plastic in the whole camera... What kind of weird film do you use, Bill:)? My film canisters (Fuji most of the time) are still metal ... Best, Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted May 13, 2009 Share #19 Posted May 13, 2009 Bill, I will try it out. I want SMALL camera... so II sounds like interesting option. Thanks for the idea. If size is your priority the II - IIIa could be good options. Otherwise I should suggest to find a Leicavit for the IIIf. It is very helpful (more than with modern Ms) as well as stylish and does not make the body much larger: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-collectors-historica/13842-ltm-users-its-time-stand-up-15.html#post741255 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iShutterbug Posted May 15, 2009 Share #20 Posted May 15, 2009 Exactly 50 years ago my dad bought a second-hand IIIf with a Summarit and a Hektor and that started my photo hobby and occasional publication. Last year I had the outfit CLA'd by DAG and it's just like new and I've been enjoying it again and getting accessories for it. Since then I picked up a IIIg on eBay because I'd always heard so much about them I wanted to see what they were all about. I just got it back from DAG along with an Elmarit I'd picked up. I'm glad I got it and here's my comments. I like the IIIg better! Although the IIIf is sexier to look at--especially with a nice fast lens mounted--I think the IIIg is more comfortable to hold and shoot because it's slightly taller than the IIIf. It's steadier in my hand. The viewfinder has the parallax-corrected 50mm and 90mm lines, which is handy although I still much prefer the accessory-shoe brightline finders. (I don't do the "stealth" street photographer thing so size isn't an issue.) Here's what I like about the IIIg the most viz a viz the IIIf: The IIIg has the "new" shutter speeds so I can take readings directly from my newer exposure meter(s) and not have to interpolate them like I have to do with my IIIf and II. (The IIIg is 1000,500,250,125,60,30.. vs 1000,500,200,100,75,50,25.. on the IIIf) I'm glad I got it and it really looks good and takes great pictures with that Elmarit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.