Hi all, first time to the forum. I'm looking into buying a Leica M. I've been offered a good deal on an M3, can someone give me some pros and cons of this camera compared to the M6? I've read that the film loading is even more cumbersome than the M6, exactly how bad is it?

M6 is a bit out of my budget at the moment, should I save up for a while longer and get that instead?

Thx all

-- Jonathan Kiu (qzi@hotmail.com), October 29, 2001

Answers

I have noticed we have two types of M users at this site. One group like myself prefer the older cameras (for their feel and look and uncluttered finders that do not flare), and the second group likes the meter and versatility of more lines of the M6 cameras, and also the fact that you can get one new or nearly new. I personally have not ever had a problem loading my M3. For people whose favorite lens is the 35mm focal length, the M3 is probably not the ideal M body either, as the near lifesize finder is best for 50 and 90mm. I put up with a lens with "eyes", but it is a limitation, as is no meter built in.

I don't know exactly how much your good deal on the M3 is, but a clean M3 with lens goes for $1000 or more these days.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), October 29, 2001.

Jonathan, an M3 or M2 is not hard to load after a little practice. It does takes an extra 10 seconds. If your interest is in the longer and/or faster lenses, then there is some point, in view of the uncluttered and flare-free finder, in having an M3. Exposure readings can be done well with the Leica-meter or other separate meter; though the cost of one ought to be figured into the decision. You could spend $200 on a good meter, it would not be more accurate than the M6's, and the $200 might be enough to extra to finance an M6.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), October 29, 2001.

Hi, Jonathan:

I'm a little biased on this respect. I'd say that any M3 in good condition at a reasonable price is an opportunity that should never be passed.

But if you want to get an independent and more detailed analysis, go to http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/mseries/choosem.html

I own two M3s and would happily buy one more (if $ allowed) just by the pleasure of it let alone the fact that it is all I need and I feel I can trust the camera to do what I want provided I'm able to . . .

Best of luck !

-Iván

-- Iván Barrientos M (ingenieria@simltda.tie.cl), October 29, 2001.

I'm one of those Philistines who owned an M3 and didn't like it. I found the loading slow and awkward, didn't like the knob rewind, found that the need for "goggles" to use a 35mm lens was annoying, and generally can't detect much difference in the feel of the camera between it and an M4-P, except that the M4-P is easier to load, rewind, and works brilliantly with a 35mm lens...

I guess I'll just not be popular amongst the M3 fancying set, eh?

That said, the loading isn't that difficult, if you shoot with 50 and 90 lenses the viewfinder is very nice, and if you're not in a hurry the slow rewind isn't a problem.

The most important thing to consider really is whether the camera you're looking at is in good condition. M3s are pretty old now, most of the ones I've seen at "good deal" prices are in need of at least a CLA if not new shutter curtains, some bits (like the double stroke wind mechanism) are no longer available. As value for money, an M4-P at an average $750-900 price tag is 15 years newer and more likely to be a "buy it and shoot" proposition. And has nice improvements over the stuff I griped about at the beginning...

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), October 29, 2001.

Johnathan,

My first Leica was an M3, and it is a very nice camera. There isn't any rangefinder patch flare and it feels very nice to use. That said, however, I now use an M6 most of the time because I use wide angle lenses - 28 and 35 - and the in camera meter is very handy.

john

-- john locher (locherjohn@hotmail.com), October 29, 2001.

The M3 is not as fast handling: loading, rewinding, taking meter readings all take longer, if seconds matter. But it does have a big, bright viewfinder, and the longest rangefinder base. So it would seem that someone with a more deliberate style, who preferred normal and longer lenses, might be suited to the M3's strengths. There's another classic Leica street style where the wider lenses and fast handling are more important. It's a matter of choosing the right tool for the job. (I'll admit my M3 had a more solid, well-crafted feel than my M6. More soul in the machine.)

-- Phil Stiles (Stiles@metrocast.net), October 29, 2001.

I just sold my M3 in favour of a M4, because I found it a little troublesome seeing the 50mm framelines w. glasses. That is really my only complaint. W. a 50mm beeing my only lens the M3 would otherwise have been ideal for me. I find the M3 more charismatic than any other M's I have held in my hands. If the deal is good and the 50/90/135 framelines suits you, there is not much to think about.
Re. the loading question: The M4 loads like the M6, and with a little practice I can load the camera without having to put the camera on eg. a table. With the M3 I needed to have a place to put the camera while "threading" the film end into the take-up spool. This procedure can be considered either annoying or charming, I choose the latter.
The lack of meter was not a problem for me, I actually prefer measuring incident light (when possible) with a handheld meter rather than reflected readings w. a build in meter.

-- Niels H. S. Nielsen (nhsn@ruc.dk), October 29, 2001.

Jonathan _ all of this seems excellent advice. My two cents worth: there's nothing wrong with something old, tried, and true. If you wanted the latest high-tech offering, you would opt for something digital or another brand. The M3 has a classic feel incomparable to anything new and plasticky. Anything mechanical CAN be fixed, albeit at a price. Film loading is not a real hassle at all. Focusing is a delight. 50mm is the most underrated lens in the world. Exposure requires a separate meter, perhaps a Leica MR meter? The M6 does have the advantage of that built-in meter. The M3 offers a saving compared with the M6 which you can use for another lens (isn't it great how you can justify actually SAVING money on Leica?!) One drawback only: you will want to keep buying more Leica stuff. The classic screwmount is quite fun for instance

-- David Killick (Dalex@inet.net.nz), October 29, 2001.

Jonathan: From a purely practical point of view the M3 has it's weaknesses, already posted above in detail. I use M4-2/Ps and the lack of a meter isn't that big a deal if you get a compact fast-working hand meter (Sekonic 318b or Gossen or Voigtlander).

The real drawback is loading/rewinding. You have to TAKE OUT the take- up spool, attach the film and then feed BOTH the film can and spool back into the camera. It requires at least three hands and/or a tabletop (or a good strong strap). And the knob rewinding takes roughly three times as long as crank rewind.

But there are aftermarket workarounds available - add-on rewind cranks and a kit that replaces the spool with an M-4/6 style quick-load spool. These will up the total price of the M3 to more than a used M6, I believe, but you don't need them to get started.

It also depends on what you have in mind for lenses. The M3 is glorious for 50 and longer, and a complete pain for 35/28mm. For 24 and below ALL Leicas need accesory finders, so the M3 loses nothing there.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), October 30, 2001.

Jonathan,I agree with all posters here. Just two kopecks from me. As a CREATION the M3 is great, as a TOOL the M3 has a limitation in using 28-35mm lens, although it has the advantages over M4P & M6 in effective length of RF-base and larger frames for 90mm and 135mm lens. Loading and lack of metering are not a problem at all. So, as it was said above make a choice what lens you prefer whether 50 or 35mm.

As for me I hate such a choice, so I have as two M3’s so the M4P with a VF equipped with six frames . I don’t like a M3 equipped with a “goggles”, a Leica-meters, additional viewfinders for short focus lenses, and other paraphernalia, it becomes so bulky as a MF-camera losing its main features as the compactness and the low weight. It requires having a heroic neck.

BTW, as for a flare of M6’ viewfinder I think that it appears due to mirror strip covering LED’s. A M4P’ VF is flare-free though it is of same design but without the mirror strip. The more information the harder taking of decision, ah:?)

In mint condition M3 to you,

Victor

-- Victor Randin (ved@enran.com.ua), October 30, 2001.

Jonathan,I did forget to mention what you probably know: the M3 VF’ coverage is 100% at close distances while M4/6’ is about 82%.

-- Victor Randin (ved@enran.com.ua), October 30, 2001.

I owned an M3 in the 80s and think it is a wonderful camera, but, I found it frustrating if you want to use it with a 35mm lens - you need either a goggle-Summaron or Summicron and these are not so easy to find and also are awkward. I used mine with the MR meter and this works very well - in some ways quite as well as an M6, but then you do not have a spare shoe to put a 35mm (or wider) finder in. In short, with the 50-90-135, they are unbeatable, but if you want wider they are less useful. Also remember for glasses owners the viewfinder will scratch your glasses horribly. For $300 odd dollars more you can get a s/h M6 TTL. This time around I am saving for a TTL.

I found I got used to the loading and rewinding, no problem. As a second body the M3 would definitely be on my shopping list. In terms of finish they are probably the nicest Leicas (with the original M4) and they have the selftimer (well, most do) and there is no r/f spot flare.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), October 30, 2001.

All good reasoned answers so far. I'll contribute my $.02. I have an M3 and M4 I've owned since approx. 1970 and I love them both for what they are. Carried them all over Mexico and western U.S. I think I can load my M2/3 as fast as I can load my new M6 (bought it last year used and didn't take it out of the drawer for 8 mo. and now I love it). Load it. Strap over your head, camera lens facing your chest, baseplate between middle and third finger of your left hand and back flipped open, pright hand pulls out spool, film in left hand goes into spool, film and spool go back into camera at the same time, check that sprocket is in film holes, baseplate back on and shutter twice and you are ready for action. M3 - full sized viewfinder, focusses 50 and 90 best of all, works fine with my 28 and 21 with finders. M2/4/6 only works better with 35 which is not as small a matter as it seems. M6 meters and I find that I'm using mine a lot now since I'm shooting color transparency material. Best advice starting out is to try both and think about what you like to do - you may not even like the rangefinder. I'm carrying my 6 with either the 3 or the 2 for a backup if I feel like I need it. But the 6 seems to do everything I want just a little better, it was built 4 years ago and I only paid a guy $1200 for it. If it was me I'd save my money and get a new M6 TTL with the rebate and build a system of a few lenses over time. good luck

-- don (wgpinc@yahoo.com), October 30, 2001.