otaku
Established
Ok so I have two choices a CLA'd m2 without a lens or an M3 (not CLA'd) with a 50mm summitar and one or two accessories and a bag. The m2 is 500 the m3 is 775 Thoughts? It'll be my first M having only used leica P&S and a digilux 3. Thanks
FrankS
Registered User
Both are good deals, you can't go wrong with either. (Check for haze in the lens though.) The main consideration is if you will want to use a 35mm lens in the future, because the M3 does not have 35mm framelines. If you are mainly a 50mm kind of shooter, then there is nothing better than an M3 with its .91 mag viewfinder and a 50mm lens. Something else to check for is the brightness of the viewfinders and the contrast of the RF patch in each camera.
peterm1
Veteran
I have an M3 and while I love it I think I would prefer an m2 (or is this a case of "the other mans grass".......?) The fact is that most people and me included probably use 35mm more than they use 135mm. You can get around it with an external finder on an M3 but this does not suit everyones taste or shooting style. I think you need to think about what type of shooting you will do most. You could always get the M2 and then go onto eBay to buy say a Summaron 35mm (without eyes which is the cheaper version) and a finder. but if you are not particularly fussed I would suggest going for the M3 and lens as its an easier chose than having to find a lens. (There is nothing worse than owning a new camera that you cannot use for want of a lens.) Besides I can vouch for the quality of a good Summitar.
colyn
ישו משיח
What lens do you plan to aquire in the future?
If a 35mm is one get the m2 since it has framelines for the 35 otherwise one's as good as the other.
Buying a non-cla'd camera is a gamble since it could cost more in the future.
If a 35mm is one get the m2 since it has framelines for the 35 otherwise one's as good as the other.
Buying a non-cla'd camera is a gamble since it could cost more in the future.
aad
Not so new now.
I was under the impression that the full VF view of the M3 was good for 35?
roundg
Well-known
CLA will be a major concern for me. I think the 500USD m2 in the classified is really a good deal.
On the other hand, if u don't use 35mm lens, like me, M3 is the best for 50mm lens.and IMO, M3 is better built than M2 (I know a lot of people will against the point).
On the other hand, if u don't use 35mm lens, like me, M3 is the best for 50mm lens.and IMO, M3 is better built than M2 (I know a lot of people will against the point).
Uncle Bill
Well-known
I own an M-3 DS and I do use the 35mm lens by using the whole viewfinder and I don't have any issues. The M-3 is the camera other M's are measured against.
Paul C. Perkins MD
Perk11350
M-2. You're far more likely to want to use 35 50 90 than 50 90 135. As for build quality - they're equal. The assertion that the M3 is the standard against which all others are measured is . . . . . overstated. I'd make the standard the first generation M4 - the apex of mechanical Leica Rfdr development and build quality.
FrankS
Registered User
...the apex of mechanical Leica Rfdr development and build quality.
Wouldn't that be the M5?
Wouldn't that be the M5?
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
No one has suggested buying both?
Am I on the right forum ...you guys are slipping!
Am I on the right forum ...you guys are slipping!
otaku
Established
The thing I like about the M3 is that it comes with the lens and they are so expensive otherwise. I've heard a good CLA can cost under 100 bucks and even then its not bad (for when I need it) Either way I suppose I'll win
colyn
ישו משיח
Uncle Bill said:
I used to be able to do this with my M3 but since I now wear glasses I have to use the bugeyed 35..
joebt
Established
You can get that M3 CLA'd by Youxin Ye for under $100 bucks, and have it back in your hands in possibly 2 weeks.
I own both the M3 DS and a M6TTL, but in my heart of hearts, I'm a M3 man. If there is a Leica out there that is better, I don't even want to know about it.
I own both the M3 DS and a M6TTL, but in my heart of hearts, I'm a M3 man. If there is a Leica out there that is better, I don't even want to know about it.
martin-f5
Well-known
I'm a MP and M2 man and I love them because they have a very clear design.
The fit perfect together:
I bought my M2 2 month ago and I would prefer the M2 because of the 35mm framelines.
I also like the filmcounter wich is a small plate outside the body.
The fit perfect together:
I bought my M2 2 month ago and I would prefer the M2 because of the 35mm framelines.
I also like the filmcounter wich is a small plate outside the body.
pvdhaar
Peter
For what it's worth, the fact that the M2 has 35mm frames does not mean that it's restricted to 35mm lenses. The choice what finder and focal length to match is really a matter of (different) tastes, and ties in into how you see the world. I find an 0.72x finder (like you'll find on the M2) with a 50mm lens a perfect match. There's lots of real estate outside the 50mm lines giving a very good impression of context, while this magnification still provides sufficient detail within the frame to evaluate content..
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Over the years I've had 3x M3 (one at a time -- own none now) and have indeed always found them the smoothest and sweetest to use. BUT -- 35mm is my favourite focal length, which is why I currently have 2x M2.
Cheers,
Roger
Cheers,
Roger
maddoc
... likes film again.
Second this ...Paul C. Perkins said:
The M4 has the best of both cameras, M3 and M2. Feel and handling of an M3 with additional frame lines for 35mm. Unfortunately more expensive ...Paul C. Perkins MD
Perk11350
...the apex of mechanical Leica Rfdr development and build quality.
Wouldn't that be the M5?
AUUUUUUUUGGGGGHHHHHHHHH !!!!!!
Wouldn't that be the M5?
AUUUUUUUUGGGGGHHHHHHHHH !!!!!!
ernstk
Retro Renaissance
M2
M2
Go for the M2. It's much less restrictive than the M3 which I find to be flawed by the omission of any kind of elegant wide angle capability (you think the goggles are elegant?).
The build quality is identical and in fact, my 1960 M2 is better built than my '69 black paint M4.
It's been CLA'd which is a real bonus so you're probably safe for 10 years of worry free shooting.
You can probably find a 50 or 35 lens and the total cost won't be much more (if at all) than the M3 by the time you have had it CLA'd.
Regards
Ernst
M2
Go for the M2. It's much less restrictive than the M3 which I find to be flawed by the omission of any kind of elegant wide angle capability (you think the goggles are elegant?).
The build quality is identical and in fact, my 1960 M2 is better built than my '69 black paint M4.
It's been CLA'd which is a real bonus so you're probably safe for 10 years of worry free shooting.
You can probably find a 50 or 35 lens and the total cost won't be much more (if at all) than the M3 by the time you have had it CLA'd.
Regards
Ernst
Everybody needs an M3.
That said, If you are inclined to the 35mm focal length, and I do think a 35/50mm kit is the best for RF photography, the CLA'd M2 is the way to go. $500 for the camera and you should be able to find a used 35 or 50mm lens to go with it to make it the same price as the available M3 kit.
With the M3 option you currently have, be sure to check the condition and function of the camera and lens. It most likely does need a CLA even if it is functioning well, it is a 40yo machine and preventative maintenance will make it last another 40. If the lens is hazed or worst has fungus, then that is no advantage in the kit as it will also need service. The good thing is, if you do want an M3 and the one you have in your sights is clean and ready to go, it is a good deal.
That said, If you are inclined to the 35mm focal length, and I do think a 35/50mm kit is the best for RF photography, the CLA'd M2 is the way to go. $500 for the camera and you should be able to find a used 35 or 50mm lens to go with it to make it the same price as the available M3 kit.
With the M3 option you currently have, be sure to check the condition and function of the camera and lens. It most likely does need a CLA even if it is functioning well, it is a 40yo machine and preventative maintenance will make it last another 40. If the lens is hazed or worst has fungus, then that is no advantage in the kit as it will also need service. The good thing is, if you do want an M3 and the one you have in your sights is clean and ready to go, it is a good deal.