Any one has had any experience with one of this, I own a 1955 M3 s# 786724, bougth in San Diego in 1986,it was already a beat up body of $225.00 USD, with a glass presure plate, has work nicely until now, but this body is going to be overhauled soon, I want to check up the double stroke system and change it if necesary, put a fast loading system like those in the M4 if possible, and want to have your opinions on the preasure plate.

Probably will be better and cheaper to buy another used body, but this one looks so nice and old that I just can´t get rid of it.

-- Roberto Watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), July 03, 2001

Answers

Roberto:

I had an M3 CLA'd by Leica, NJ last year. It cost $575.00 and included a new rangefinder (delaminating), single stroke advance (parts not available for double stroke), adjusting, cleaning and modern flash synch posts (replacing the M3 style). Was it worth it? YES. I have had it for 30 years and know it's history. It doesn't look as nice a others, but it runs like a Leica not a ?*#~"~!. I already have the quick load kit, so it loads similar to my M6. I don't know about the pressure plate. Mine does not have the glass one. If you paid $225.00 for it plus another $600.00, you have about $825.00 into the camera, less if you went to someone else to do the work. Is it worth that to you? Shoot some more pictures and then decide. Enjoy.

Mark J.

-- Mark A. Johnson (logic@gci.net), July 03, 2001.

Roberto,

I know someone who regards the glass pressure plate of the early M3's as superior to the metal ones. As I understand it, those who value the glass pressure plate feel that it was capable of being machined flatter than a metal one. I suppose they could retain their flatness better, too. A metal plate can be bent. A glass one is either flat or broken!

Regards,

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), July 04, 2001.

Roberto:

Keep your M3! Send it to Leica USA in NJ for a CLA. They will take it apart and repair or replace whatever is necessary. I recently did this with two M3 bodies, one a 1954 M3 DS and the other one a 1961 M3 SS. I also had them replace the peeling vulcanite with a M6 style covering. Now both of them look like brand new cameras! I had bought both cameras in "user" condition at bargain prices. Now they look as good as my new M6 TTL. They have done an amazingly good job of cleaning and overhauling the cameras. I am really impressed with the quality of the work. And I can also appreciate more now why the M3 is considered a classic! I did have to wait about 2 months for the work to be done. Leica NJ always has a large backlog of service orders. BTW, I did not change the pressure plate or the double stroke film winding system on my 1954 M3, or put in a film quickloading spool. Why mess with a classic?.....................

-- Muhammad Chishty (applemac97@aol.com), July 04, 2001.

Roberto,

I have both M3’s with måtal and glass plates. They differ in a film channel design: the M3 DS with a glass plate has one pair of rails and glass circles above and under a film gate, while the M3 SS with a metal plate has two pare of rails and no glass circles. Both are working well. M3 DS seems to me a little smoother when advancing a film. I think that producing of a metal plate has significant less operations and so is cheaper than producing a glass one plus four adjusted glass circles instead of founded additional pair of rails, and Leitz refused glass details. Enjoy with Leica variety.

Victor

-- Victor Randin (ved@enran.com.ua), July 04, 2001.

The ceramic pressure plate of Contax RTS III and Contax T2 is a reincarnation of the M3 glass pressure plate

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), July 04, 2001.

Roberto,

When I started to think about buying a Leica, (a long time ago!), all of the information that I could put my hands on said that the M3 was the cheapest way to go, based on the shear numbers of that model. Several of the articles in "SHUTTERBUG" and "POPULAR PHOTOGRAPHY" warned to buy a serial number over 850xxx, because all of the bugs were worked out by that number. I bought two cameras the same day, one was 890xxx, and the second was too good a deal to not buy, with serial number 780xxx. One of the big warnings about the glass pressure plate was that it was prone to static build up during winding and especially the long process of rewinding. One article actually had examples of negatives with what looked like lightning bolts, supposedly caused by this phenomenon. The bottom line is that I used both of these cameras side by side for about five years, and could not see any adverse effect from the glass plate. This is not to say that it couldn't happen, I would think that environmental factors could contribute... low humidity, and cool crisp air, but I never experienced any problems. If this is a real concern, you can swap the hinged backs in about three seconds if you can acquire one from a non-working camera. You can retain the original for potential future sale to a collector that might wish for the correct plate by vintage.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), July 04, 2001.

Thank´s for your answers fellows; it encourages me to do the overhaul sooner, any way ther are not going to have it ready until next year, and I also belive any Leica in any condition when overhauled by leica is like a brand new one, no way around it.Thanks again.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), July 04, 2001.