Worth it to trade an MP for 2 M2s or M3s?

M

markbrennan

Established
Local time
9:18 PM
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
84
View My Gallery
Hey all -

I got so many interesting and useful replies to my previous query about a double stroke M3 that I thought I'd run this rather crazy idea by you. Feel free to slam it, contradict it, or otherwise critique it, etc.

I've been using a .72 MP for approximately 18 months and love it. Completely converted to the Leica RF way. I ONLY shoot 50mm (latest 'cron). I occassionally think of using a 35 but feel the 50 suits me and I like the discipline. After more than 2 years of using only a 50 I am finally internalizing the framing.

My preferred genre is street and I therefore take the camera pretty much wherever I go (although a corporate job keeps me off the streets most days, alas!). The MP, as well as any M for that matter, is perfect for this style of shooting, as you all well know.

The simplicity of the one camera/one lens/one film way has kept me away from thinking about new kit until just recently when I realized my MP needs servicing. It's covered under Passport but I dread being without the camera. My only RF backup is a Canon P - nice cam, but not Leica. Ideally, I'd love another M, but cannot justify, or even afford, another MP, or even an M6 for that matter.

Which leads me to the idea of "converting" the value of my MP into approximately 2 M2 or M3 bodies. Not sure that's viable, price-wise. But I find it compelling. Wondering what people think of that idea?

And it appeals to me on a different level. My MP meter recently ran out of juice during a vacation (forgot an extra 3V!) and I suddenly realized my dependence on its meter. The appeal of the M3 or M2 is that you must go meterless; even using a small handheld meter, as I have done w/ my Canon P, you eventually learn to read light without a meter. It seems purer. And the finder is less cluttered (at least on the M2).

I know that Nick ("LazyHammock") told me in my previous thread that he actually now prefers his M3 over his MP. I have also heard people like Tom Abrahamsson say how much they love the M2 due to its uncluttered framelines. The M3 appeals for its wonderful .91 finder for the 50. But the M2 appeals for its uncluttered finder and its versatility of adding a 35.

So this boils down to 2 questions:
1) Is it worth trading in (selling) my MP in order to buy 2 M2s or M3s (if pricing works)? Plan would be to buy an M2 or M3, send the MP for CLA at Leica, NJ, sell it, buy another M2 or M3 - in that order.
2) Which would you buy, an M2 or an M3?

I know some will say one of each, but I really like consistency, so see value in having 2 of the same for seamless switching.

Would love to know your thoughts! Apologies for the long thread - it's late!

Regards,
-Mark
 
If it were me I would keep the MP, I can't specifically say why, I just know that I would. I've also been trying to get into the less is more mindset and have been carrying my M8 or M6 (Depending on what I'm doing, where I'm going and if the backlog of undeveloped film isn't to large) and one lens. If you start thinking like that you'r going to be constantly trading this for that.

Also having the meter just in case is always good (for me atleast) and you can always take the batteries out to get more in touch with your inner light source.

Someone else will feel differently then me but I wanted to share.
 
if you love the 50 FL, as you claim, then go with a M3. Particularly if you like the discipline of shooting just one lens/film. But I love the MP, too. I wouldn't get rid of it; it is like a M3 with a meter and übersecki styling🙂 I recommend you save 50/mon and in one year buy yourself a good user M3. This is my bias, though, as my main street combination is the mp and m3.
 
If you can say that you will NEVER use a 35, then go with the M3. If however, you 'think' about using a 35 and can see it happening at some point, then the M2 MUST be your sensible choice. At the risk of offending some M3 users, the idea of using a 35 with goggles would fill me with horror.

I think the idea of both an M2 and an M3 is not as bad as you imagine. The viewfinder magnification would be the biggest practical difference but since you'd prob have different lenses on them anyway, at any given time, (35 on the 2, 50 on the 3) how much of a challenge would this really be?

Regards
Ernst
 
Trading one camera for two would be a tempting notion if money were tight. If the condition is still close to new and you have all of the original packaging, you do have the value in the MP to pull it off.

If you finally decide to do it though, I would suggest an M6 classic and an M3.

But since it is what you have gotten accustomed to I would encourage you to keep the MP and buy a "user" M3 (second body) when you get the extra cash. In this case, you might be surprised which body actually ends up being the back-up.
 
I had a similar problem,
when I take photos at daylight the 100 ASA film in my MP has a rest of some photos,
then the night comes and I want to use a 400 ASA TriX but I don't want to put out the 100 ASA APX of the camera.
Unfortuntaly I can't, no I don't want, afford a second MP so I searched a M2.
The M2 is on the way to me, at saturday it will be in the mail (I hope so)

But I never will sell my MP, never.
The MP is the latest developement of a mechanical camera,
all was improved, new materials are used.
So I hope she, yes my MP is like a girlfriend, she will last for ever.

In future I will have 2 Ms, the MP with 100 ASA Film loaded and the M2 (perhaps a black M6) with a 400 ASA Film loaded.

The lack of a lightmeter in the M2 is a problem I will have to solve,
for nightshots I must have a spotmeter, but they are much more expensive than a M2.
I may use the meter in the MP and add 2 f-stops,
the meters of the Ms are very accurate.

attachment.php
 
martin-f5 said:
I had a similar problem,
when I take photos at daylight the 100 ASA film in my MP has a rest of some photos,
then the night comes and I want to use a 400 ASA TriX but I don't want to put out the 100 ASA APX of the camera.
Unfortuntaly I can't, no I don't want, afford a second MP so I searched a M2.
The M2 is on the way to me, at saturday it will be in the mail (I hope so)

But I never will sell my MP, never.
The MP is the latest developement of a mechanical camera,
all was improved, new materials are used.
So I hope she, yes my MP is like a girlfriend, she will last for ever.

In future I will have 2 Ms, the MP with 100 ASA Film loaded and the M2 (perhaps a black M6) with a 400 ASA Film loaded.

The lack of a lightmeter in the M2 is a problem I will have to solve,
for nightshots I must have a spotmeter, but they are much more expensive than a M2.
I may use the meter in the MP and add 2 f-stops,
the meters of the Ms are very accurate.

attachment.php
Click to expand...

Plus Martin has one of the most beautiful MP's out there.
But my general experiences with Girlfriends is they don't last forever...
Keep the MP, please, unless you want to trade my M6 for it. Then do that 😉
 
One of each. Here's why, in your words: "The M3 appeals for its wonderful .91 finder for the 50. But the M2 appeals for its uncluttered finder and its versatility of adding a 35."
 
Mark,

to answer your questions: I wouldn´t sell the MP. If you need a second body try to find a cheap, but working M2 ( or M3).

Martin,

congrats. You made the right decision. I hope, you will like the M2. Think about a cla and after that it should work as good as your MP.

Thomas
 
NO.




That MP is an ungodly devine machine. You will regret it horrendously later on. Patience and diligence will help you to put aside an amount every month for a few and you will find a bargain user body (be it a cheapo Spotmatic or anything else to keep you in pictures), out there to tide you over when the divine machine is in the clinic.


Do NOT cave in to whimsical mood swings when an MP is involved.
 
HI,
Not sure if what I will say can help you here, but here it goes anyway.
First, I think you sort of answered your own question in your orignal post - You have used your MP for 18 months - and love it!. If so - keep it.
You say that it needs service already, just after 18 months? Hmmm. Odd, considering it's supposed to be a top of the line machine. My M3 was CLA'd for the first time this year and it worked very well till now. So, - this would steer me towards M3 or M2. WHatever new technilogy and materials they use now, it seems that things were built better back in a day.
So, what was my point? I think I'd keep the MP if I were you, since you like it so much, maybe sell Canon P and maybe some other stuff to get a back up Leica M. Which - M3 or M2? Well, I'd go for M3, as it has a higher magnification VF. Also, handling of M3 would seem to be more similar to MP, but I'm just guessing here - never used MP or M2.
So, that is what I would do.
 
No help on MP, I do no own one, btu rather M6. Recently I added a beater M3, throroughly CLAed one (thanks Youxin - wonderful work), no I hardly can come back to my M6. M3 is so smooth and quiet, noticeably more on that then by flawless M6. M3 is just a pure joy of shooting experience. Not that m6 is very far behind, but M3 is just such smooth, now I begin to realize what people used to rant about "buttery smooth" feeling of their M3 mechanics. And of course, that large clean finder awith large, well defined RF patch - proved to allow faster and easier focusing then 0.72 bodies. The later bodies (at least M6 and on...) offers more contrasty/neutral finders, that is indeed the case, but that of M3 (deliberately bluish view with yellowish patch) conpensate that by a larger magnification, larger RF patch.
BTW, my M3 gets most of work with 50mm 'Cron, occasionally (potrature or double-camera street setup) - carries my 90mm Elmarit. It excells with both of these...
I'll be into 35mm 'Cron ASPH soon, this is where my M6 will get back in the game...
 
Some time ago I was in a similar position. Starting with a M6 I migrated to a MP and then wanted a second affordable M body (since I sold the M6). I bought a M3 and later A M3 with M2 viewfinder. Nice cameras very smooth, meterless (I use a small hand held meter anyway) but ... these cameras are quite old, the viewfinder is not that bright as the one of newer M cameras.

So I sold them both and got me a M4-P. Not that smooth as the MP but somehow identical. No battery, same viewfinder as my MP and robust. The M4-P is more a camera for daily use, at least for me. It is not that expensive and I think quite underrated. For sure the M4-P has not the character of an M2 or M3 but this camera is "only" 20 years old and with a CLA (wonderful work from Youxin Ye) it should be good for another 20 or 30 years. I think it is better to keep the MP and couple it with an M4-2 or M4-P. Just my two cents...


Gabor
 
I'm interested in why the MP needs a service - what makes you think so? It hadn't occurred to me that CLAs were required for anything other than elderly models that were being put to new use. I can see the need for a second M of course (I actually have four) so I like the idea of saving for a nice M2 or M3 to get in due course, but carry on with the MP until then.
 
Ultiamtely, you will have to decide this for yourself. If it were me, I'd sell the MP for two M2's or M3's in a heartbeat.

The new MP is a fine camera, and if money were no object, I'd like to have one (in the 0.85 finder, incase divine intervention is listening...). But in reality, the M3 is all I need or want. Like you, I find the 50mm lens to be my prefered focal length about 90% of the time. So the M3's finder is ideal- well, unless I could have a 1:1 finder in it (Maybe I should sell it and get a Nikon S2 or S3?). After owning a few other M cameras, I decided to my suprise that I prefered the M3. Learning to shoot without an internal meter is pretty easy, and a real joy- both in self-confidence, and in not having those flashing lights in the finder. I take a reading with my hand held or using Sunny 16, and set my exposure, adjusting a little on the fly if the light changes. I find I shoot faster and more intuitively now, especially shooting negatives. My exposures are fine; chromes take a little more careful metering, but that's fine.

The MP looks and feels much better than any Leica in a while, but the build quality and craftsmanship of the those older classic era Leicas is better. Nobody can make cameras like that these days -they'd cost 5 times more than the current Leicas do. Never mind the beauty, there's just really nothing like a well maintained M2 or M3 for actually shooting with, IMO. Even if you take price out of the equasion, I prefer my M3. Add price back into the equasion, and the possibility of having two or even three for the price of one MP, and for me there's absolutley no contest.

Older used M's are going pretty cheap these days- $500 is not at all unheard-of for M2's and M3's. If you can get $2000 for your MP, you could get 2 M2/3's, and still afford the CLA's they might need to get them to perfect service condition. You might even be able to squeeze three older bodies out of an MP sale, if you are lucky. Or add another lens or two; or buy a boatload of film to stock your freezer, or travel or do any number of things. Remember, if you can shoot without an internal meter, any M with the same lens can make the same negatives- so which camera (or cameras) give you the most value for your money?
 
Hi Drew -
Very interesting reply - stands out from the rest, I guess, because it's rather more in line w/ my current thinking, although not to discount what others have said about keeping the MP; and certainly there's a lot of food for thought here.

Austerby - the adjustment (CLA) for my MP is not superfluous, but necessary due to issues firing the shutter. If I have not moved the advance lever out after winding (cocking), the shutter often does not fire. This causes missed shots and interferes with the handling of the camera. It's becoming critical and I dread the 4-8 weeks I expect Leica NJ to take servicing the camera (under Passport, so no cost to me). Additionally the rewind knob (which I love) has been slipping; it's supposed to lock if you pause the rewind. And the finder eye piece has dust on the inside. So I have 3 specific areas to adjust, and one critically. This, after approx. 18 months. It's a manual camera, so I can accept it needs adjustment. But it comes at an inconvenient time.

The Canon P was my first rangefinder and I loved the large finder and not having a meter. As Drew mentioned, going w/out a meter was indeed liberating. But I dislike the focusing on the P, and the controls aren't ideal.

My one fear w/ older Ms is whether the finders will be bright enough and the RF patches contrasty enough. Otherwise, it really dawns on me that the MP is a bit wasted on me. I will keep my latest 50 'cron which I love - superb lens. But I expect an M2 or M3 would handle equally well, if not better than my MP.

The idea of having 2 M bodies (which I realize many of you have) will relieve the "burden" off of my single, very expensive, MP. I am not a pro, will never be, but like shooting as much as I can, so want my gear to be clean, comfortable, and seamless.

As a counter-example, my wife and I were entertaining this evening so I picked up my Canon P which had 3200 speed B&W in it to take some indoor shots. Had lots of trouble focusing w/ the dull RF patch on the P. Then, upon finishing the roll, I literally forgot how to rewind the P! Forgot to toggle the dial under the shutter so the crank wouldn't rewind. Pulled it up and rewound the crank without really rewinding any film! Ruined the roll!

Stupid mistake and easily corrected, but my point is I want one single camera system. I don't want to have to think about the controls or worry about which camera I'm using at any given time.

The idea of 2 classic Ms is appealing, but I realize I may also be romanticizing them, in the quest for some kind of old, classic, manual, B&W film purity. That's why i'm posting my ideas, in the hopes of getting good dialogue going; I certainly don't mind be contradicted or told I'm nuts, fatuous, quixotic, etc.

I think Drew's post is quite compelling, but I'm open to all other ideas, too.

Thanks again, everyone.

regards,
-Mark
 
Unless I missed it, you have not convincingly articulated why you need two bodies of the same model. Unless you feel the need to shoot two bodies at the same time, or need complete redundancy, two bodies is a luxurious surplus. It seems to me that if the two old cameras aren't really identical, you may end up favoring the one that is slightly better (or slightly more of a cosmetic "user"). I occasionally think I would like a second M5, but I am an amateur and the marginal value to me of that second identical body is very small.

You can already shoot the MP without the battery if you want an unplugged experience.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom