M3 or M6 x0.85 ?

[furcafe]

FWIW, I bought the M6 TTL 0.85 specifically to use the built-in meter when shooting in tricky available darkness situations (the TTL's meter is also a stop or 2 more sensitive than that in the M6 "Classic"). If you're doing fine w/an external meter, then I agree that there is no need to go beyond the M3. You mentioned "the audience" seeing your camera, so perhaps you're shooting in the theatre, etc., where lighting is more predictable.

I did get the flare-reduction parts installed in my M6 by DAG because it was a significantly annoying problem in the sort of conditions I usually shoot in (indeed, even the M2 & M4 RF patches can experience "white out," just not as often as the late M4-2, M4-P, & M6). However, I have never had a problem w/the reversed shutter speed dial of the M6 TTL & prefer it for my shooting style (1 reason why the MP has little attraction to me). Unlike when I use metered cameras, I rarely turn the shutter speed dial while looking through my old meterless bodies (I meter & change settings beforehand).

 

[Matthew Runkel]

I realize they are naturally little bit less contrasty then these of contemporary cameras such as M4, M6...

It would be interesting to hear some opinions on this point. I don't think the M3 viewfinder got its stellar reputation by being less contrasty than those of later models (other than the current models).

In any event, if the issue is usability of your M3's finder in low light, I would not be so quick to rule out your M3's finder as the culprit. I briefly (< 1 day) owned an M3 with a finder patch that was fine in daylight but almost unusable in dim indoor light. After a conversation with Sherry Krauter about the prospects, I returned that camera and soon found another with a much better finder.

 

[payasam]

A 0.85 M6 will give you a meter and 35mm frame lines. It will also give you a cluttered finder.

 

[MikeL]

On my M6 classic with 0.85, the patch whiteout was troublesome even when I moved my eye around. To me, not being able to focus in some situations made it a "big deal". After getting the finder upgrade I haven't had a problem and contrast in low light improved.

If you are usin the cameras in low light, you might notice a difference in contrast between the M3 and M6 with finder upgrade (I noticed a slight difference with the late M3 I had), but I doubt it will affect your ability to focus. Patch whiteout did for me.

If you plan to use a 35mm a lot, you should be able to find an upgraded M6 for 1500.

 

[furcafe]

The M3 finder is darker than the M6 (& even the M4) in that the VF is noticeably tinted. Normally this would increase the contrast between the RF patch & framelines & the rest of the VF (I think that was the idea, anyway), but if those are dimmed by dirt, decementing, etc., then I suppose one could say that the entire thing would be less contrasty than a clean, modern RF/VF.

It would be interesting to hear some opinions on this point. I don't think the M3 viewfinder got its stellar reputation by being less contrasty than those of later models (other than the current models).

In any event, if the issue is usability of your M3's finder in low light, I would not be so quick to rule out your M3's finder as the culprit. I briefly (< 1 day) owned an M3 with a finder patch that was fine in daylight but almost unusable in dim indoor light. After a conversation with Sherry Krauter about the prospects, I returned that camera and soon found another with a much better finder.

 

[kafrf]

Stay with M3

Stay with M3

Well, now that using my M3 for about a year and half, a weird, seditious thoughts begun bothering my mind...
Perhaps I'd be more comfortable with M6 x0.85 ? for 50mm or longer ?
low light.agnification that is larger then of my regular M6 yet a bit lower then that of M3 ?

Is M6 x0.85 indeed nearly as useful with 90mm lens as M3 with its x0.91 magnification ? What your experience tell you ?

I've used both, now have an M7, which is my primary 35mm, but the M3 cannot be beat, and I carry it in my bag all the time.

 

[Turtle]

If you want the most usable camera with a 0.85 finder, it is any M with a meter and the MP finder.

The M3 finder is darker and of lower contrast than the MP finders. The patch however, will not flare no matter what you do (I own them models we are talking about).

 

[alexz]

Thank you all for your advises and opinions.
I spent a few hours re-checking the issues. It appears the viewfinder in my M3 is OK, no any particular mulfunctioning, neither RF patch is problematic. I gather that it is inherent to M3 to have somewhat less bright/contrasty vf (or probaly due to deliberate yellowish coating) and once getting used to higher contrast vfs of contemporary Ms it may be a bit harder to work in really dim lighting conditions with M3 (albeit it might be somewhat compensated by higher magnification). All that bearing in mind that in good or average lighting the RF patch in my M3 looks really good and the entire window is clean of dust except of few fine specs of dust in RF patch that do not impact its capabilities in either way.

I feel I'm leaning to the decision of swapping my M3 by 0.85 M6 with MP-upgraded RF, even though realising will probably never feel that mechancial smoothenss in it as I do with my M3.

Yet again, meter consideration isn't somehting to infuence my decision, but the ability to easy focus in really dim lighting, black body and somewhat lighter weight (then that of M3).

Perhaps even figuring a nice 0.85 MP would be an ultimate solution, not sure I'll be able to stretch my budget such far (even after selling my M3)...

 

[Rayt]

I opted for the M3 DS because it was much cheaper than .85x M6/M6TTL/MP. There is hardly any difference between .91x and .85x but I agree the .85x will be more useful if you also plan to use a 35mm with it.

 

[Turtle]

My M3 finder has a blueish cast to it. Very noticeable next to modern Ms. If yours is really quite dark and/or yellow this could be due to degradation of the organic cement used in the prism. I believe it can cause yellowing. An old M2 I have is dark, yellow and low contrast.

 

[alexz]

Actually it's probably indeed more blueish then yellow-tinted. it certainly not unusually dark and just some year and half ago it was fully treated by Youxin who confirmed the VF and RF are just fine. There is no any visible signs or optical issues in it (such as separation, etc...).
I think this is something inherent to M3s - just a bit dimmer VF (and thus RF patch) comparative to a modern Ms.
In fact, I do not notice any issues with it whatsoever unless shooting in decidedly dim conditions of under, say, 8 EV.
Wouldn't my shooting style consist large percentage of such kind of work, I probably wouldn't be aware of that issue.