martinvath Posted June 8, 2009 Share #1 Posted June 8, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Today I came by my local Leica dealer, and found that he had two old cameras for sale: M2 with 50/2.8 Elmar collabsible at $930 and M4 with 35 Summicron at $1300 Normaly I shoot Digilux 2, but think an oldtimer would be fun. I have a Hexar AF for film already, and it is very good, but lack the tactile feeling of manual focus and filmwinding. Now I wonder if I should try to get one of theese, but which one is to prefer? I have used a 35-R Summicron, so I know it is good, but how about the 50 Elmar? Kind regards Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 8, 2009 Posted June 8, 2009 Hi martinvath, Take a look here Which M to get. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
earleygallery Posted June 8, 2009 Share #2 Posted June 8, 2009 The Elmar is a perfectly fine lens (I assume its the early version rather than the more recently issued lens). The M4 has more frame line options than the M2 and is a later model, but the M2 is lovely and uncluttered. The Summicron 35 is a classic lens...(which version?). Either choice is great. I would say go for the camera/lens combination which you prefer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted June 8, 2009 Share #3 Posted June 8, 2009 ... Either choice is great. I would say go for the camera/lens combination which you prefer. Second that. However, my personal choice (just because you asked) would be to go for the M2 & 2.8/50. The M2 might as well be the best M ever IMHO, followed by the M3 & MP (equally), and the Elmar is a lovely little lens with great IQ which makes a very compact package together with the M2. You can always add a 35 later (oh and btw you will, once you get started, the Leica bug will never leave you!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 8, 2009 Share #4 Posted June 8, 2009 I frankly suggest to take BOTH ... ... prior or later, if you start with a M you'll end up with at least two bodies (not to speak of lenses... ), so why to wait ? Both are excellent cameras & lenses. If you wish to limit to ONE... toss a coin: no matters, because it is only a matter of time... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryW Posted June 8, 2009 Share #5 Posted June 8, 2009 James has given good advice - get the one you are most comfortable with. I have an M2 with a CV 40 1.4. To me the M2 is a great camera - very simple, uncluttered, tremendous tactile quality. I would want the 35 mm Summicron however - is there any way that the camera shop would change the lenses so that you end up with an M2 / 35 f2.0. Just a thought Regards Harry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikFive Posted June 8, 2009 Share #6 Posted June 8, 2009 An M4 with a 35 summicron for 1300$ is the no brainer IMO. You will easily get close to 2K$ if you would like to sell them again as well. The M2 with Elmar is worth about 1K$ together, but the M4 you can get 800$+ depending on condition and its the same for the Summicron. The M4 also has the tulip which makes film loading easier. Its also the nicest of the classics IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leitz_not_leica Posted June 9, 2009 Share #7 Posted June 9, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) M4 Summicron, any version, but espcially v 1 and v 4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted June 9, 2009 Share #8 Posted June 9, 2009 Either would be very nice. The difference is $370 -- how many films will that buy? Or a short trip somewhere scenic or a celebration for your new purchase? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
antistatic Posted June 9, 2009 Share #9 Posted June 9, 2009 I would ask them if they would sell me the M2 with the 35 summicron (just to be difficult) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fernmelder Posted June 9, 2009 Share #10 Posted June 9, 2009 I'd take the M4, sine it has the simpler loading and rewinding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
azzo Posted June 9, 2009 Share #11 Posted June 9, 2009 ............. " the Leica bug will never leave you! " ........................... Very true. Good light and have fun with whatever you choose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted June 9, 2009 Share #12 Posted June 9, 2009 The M2 gets my vote. I have had M6, M4 and currently M2 and M7. The M2 is the purest version of the M "vision". It handles with a buttery smoothness and has the most uncluttered viewfinder; simply a pleasure to use. Loading is no big deal, and if you wish you can even get the quick load kit. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finnkare Posted June 9, 2009 Share #13 Posted June 9, 2009 If you must have a 35 or the extra speed and can't break the "sets", buy the M4. Otherwise, go for the M2. It's the classicity and simplicity that appeals to me. If you have a 135, the frameline for it in the M4 is more like a curiosity anyway, at least without a magnifier. People say that the loading is only a little faster and also less reliable. I maybe even prefer the older rewind. To me, the differences don't justify the price difference. Unless the M2 is very early or in much worse condition and the M4 very late and in much better condition. But I also happen to like 50 mm more than 35 anyway. If the lenses were the other way around, I might think again. Maybe I'd try to buy only the M2 or recombine... M2+Elmar 50: + needs less money to be transformed into a camera+lens + thinner (with the lens collapsed) + simpler = easier + more classic (if one likes) + a bit more reliable to load + a bit nicer to rewind (if one likes) - a bit slower to load - a bit slower to rewind - slower lens - older (inner parts more likely to be in worse condition, depending on individuals. Also another issue is wheter it has any effect during your use) - needs an adapter for flash The M4+Summicron 35 combination of course has the plusses and minuses the other way around, respectively. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
topoxforddoc Posted June 9, 2009 Share #14 Posted June 9, 2009 I'd buy the M2, but ask to buy the 35. Charlie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
E.M Posted June 9, 2009 Share #15 Posted June 9, 2009 For me the M4 is the nicest M-body, and 35 the best allround lens. Etienne Michiels Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinvath Posted June 9, 2009 Author Share #16 Posted June 9, 2009 Thanks for Your answers, they don´t actually make desissions easier ;o) Both cameras seems in fine working condition, the M4 has a little ding in top plate. Two years separates them, so late M2 early M4 I guess. The M2 felt nice, I like the 50mm, framelines easy to see because I wear glasses. Just wondered how good the Elmar is wide open compared to the cron. The extra speed of the cron would be nice to have, but because I´m on a limited budget (not the best starting point in Leicaworld I know) I think I´ll take another look at the M2. Any sugestions to lightmeter, I´ve looked at a Voigtlander VC from Camera Quest and a Sekonic 308s. The Leicaguy also had the original Leicameter at $250, which I think is a little too much for an old meter. Best regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finnkare Posted June 9, 2009 Share #17 Posted June 9, 2009 Thanks for Your answers, they don´t actually make desissions easier ;o)Both cameras seems in fine working condition, the M4 has a little ding in top plate. A ding might indicate some internal damage, but not necessarily. Two years separates them, so late M2 early M4 I guess.The M2 felt nice, I like the 50mm, framelines easy to see because I wear glasses. Interesting. The framelines on both cameras are the same except for the 135mm frame which appears on the M4 with the 35mm frame. Moreover, the M2 has (most likely) the depth of field -estimation marks on the viewfinder. Just wondered how good the Elmar is wide open compared to the cron.The extra speed of the cron would be nice to have, but because I´m on a limited budget (not the best starting point in Leicaworld I know) I think I´ll take another look at the M2. I haven't owned either, but if they are from the same age, probably their wide-open performance is quite similar. The Elmar probably shows a bit less distortion and flare. Any sugestions to lightmeter, I´ve looked at a Voigtlander VC from Camera Quest and a Sekonic 308s.The Leicaguy also had the original Leicameter at $250, which I think is a little too much for an old meter. If you prefer reflected metering, go for the VC. Separate spot meters suit quite poorly to carry-around shooting, and other hand held meters are quite hard to point. At least when you compare a meter attached to your hot shoe to a meter stacked in your bag or pocket. If you prefer incident metering, the Sekonic seems decent. Although I myself prefer more analogic controls like of, say, the L-208, L-398A, Gossen Digisix or Digiflash. The first two also work without batteries, which is quite remarkable. Not in the most darkest situations, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted June 9, 2009 Share #18 Posted June 9, 2009 Any sugestions to lightmeter, I´ve looked at a Voigtlander VC from Camera Quest and a Sekonic 308s. The Leicaguy also had the original Leicameter at $250, which I think is a little too much for an old meter. Best regards Go the whole hog and free yourself from the tyranny of a meter. Sunny-16 (or Sunny-11 as it tends to be in more Northern climes) and some black and white film is all you need. I have a small Gossen Digisix but frankly tend to leave it at home 99% of the time. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted June 9, 2009 Share #19 Posted June 9, 2009 Don't worry about the quality of the Elmar. As I've said go with your personal preference, there's no wrong answers here! Here's a 'test' I made a while back comparing the earlier 3.5 Elmars with a later 2.8 (although shot at 3.5 but I would see no practical difference wide open). http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-collectors-historica/19410-elmars-comparison-4-images.html Maybe buy one of the bodies and both lenses, that would be ideal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted June 10, 2009 Share #20 Posted June 10, 2009 I recommend a Sekonic 308. Compact, precise, accurate, and easy to use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.