M3 vs M4P dilemma

CopperB

CopperB

M3 Noob
Local time
4:07 PM
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
Messages
284
I'm considering buying an M4P + 50mm 2 Summicron combo to replace my M3. My M3 patch is faded and a challenge to focus. The M4 is a breeze to focus and easier to load. It's got some wear, obviously been used a lot but is smooth as silk.

The problem is my M3 is just so aesthetically pleasing especially with my recently purchased collapsable 50mm 'cron. I'll have to sell the M3 to finance the M4P (but not the collapsable 'cron obviously). Never thought I was a shallow person, swayed by good looks but... ;)
 
Unfortunately with a dim finder you may not be able to sell the M3 for what you expect. Have you had the camera looked at by a repairman to see if there is anything that can be done to brighten it?
 
I imagine this is probably not what you want to hear but I have owned both and in my view the M3 is better built. The M4P is OK (it is a Leica after all) but I found it had some problems 30 years or so years after it was built.

The finder tends to develop quite a bit of haze over time (but can be cleaned quite OK) and more problematic the little "nipples" for the flash sync at the back of the camera can break off. It seems they screw into a plastic block and that can crack over time.

There have been a number of reports of this in forums so its not isolated. In fact there was a thread here on how to fix it - assuming you can find the parts. I did but they were quite expensive. Apart from those quirks I found it to be a good camera but as I said the M3 is better in my view.

The prior thread

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82826
 
Last edited:
My understanding is that the previous owner of my M3 had it CLA'd a couple of years ago and the patch was brightened as much as possible. It might be worth sending it into TO for CLA.
 
Each M will take the same picture.
If you get focused (no pun intended) on the attributes of the individual camera, then its not photography but camera collecting. If your M3 finder is dim and already been serviced, why throw money away on more service. Personally I would save until I could purchase a good late model M that has an acceptable finder and will last you a long time until you either need another M or a CLA. Purchasing a well used camera is a hit or miss proposition.-Dick
 
I think if you like the M3 this much, you will regret selling it. If the RF patch is the only issue, I'd look at fixing that. As rover mention, you'll also not get as much as you'd like by selling the M3 with the dim patch.

I had Sherry Krauter do a CLA on my M3 and it looks amazing. You can call her and see what your options are to increase the rangefinder patch contrast.
 
Sounds as though the rangefinder needs to be replaced.

In the M3, the replacement finder is the M6J. I know this is what Sherry K does but Don Goldberg can resilver the prisms and get it bright again.

Why dont you email Don and get his view.

If you do send it to Don expect a 4 month turnaround.

Sherry's turnaround is more like 5 weeks.
 
Thanks for all the info. Any guesses on the cost of replacing the finder? I'd prefer to hang onto my M3 but thought that nothing could be done with it.
What about tech support in Toronto? Who CLA's there and what is the quality of work? I'd prefer to avoid cross border hassles shipping it to the US for servicing.
 
The logical thing to do is have your M3 fixed rather than try and sell it the way it is to finance an M4-P

Having said that... I recently handed and shot a borrowed M4-P. It was black chrome and well used.
The inside was a bit dusty but otherwise OK.

Of course the big "Made in Canada" engraving reminds you of its origins but I have to tell you it felt good.
Smooth and very Leica like which makes sense because it is a Leica. (Duhh... :rolleyes:)
IMO my M3 is nicer but the differences are very small. Often these difference are soon forgotten once you start using the camera.

Maybe it's a bit unfair to compare every newer Leica to an M3/M2 or M4.
After all they were made in a different time.

Edit: Just read your above post.

http://www.sherrykrauter.com/index.php
 
Last edited:
sc_rufctr said:
The logical thing to do is have your M3 fixed rather than try and sell it the way it is to finance an M4-P

Of course the big "Made in Canada" engraving reminds you of its origins but I have to tell you it felt good.
Smooth and very Leica like which makes sense because it is a Leica. (Duhh... :rolleyes:)

Edit: Just read your above post.

http://www.sherrykrauter.com/index.php
Click to expand...


See, I don't see the Made in Canada as a drawback. Of course it felt good. It was made in Canada. ;)In fact it's a draw for this Canuck.

I've emailed Sherry. Thanks for your thoughts. Repairing the M3 does make more sense.
 
Last edited:
sc_rufctr said:
Maybe it's a bit unfair to compare every newer Leica to an M3/M2 or M4.
After all they were made in a different time.
Click to expand...

... very true. The older ones were top-notch 40 years ago (and are now most often worn out and with dim RF), while the newer M Leicas don't have the class and feel of the older ones but a RF patch with high contrast. :p:D:angel:
 
maddoc said:
... very true. The older ones were top-notch 40 years ago (and are now most often worn out and with dim RF), while the newer M Leicas don't have the class and feel of the older ones but a RF patch with high contrast. :p:D:angel:
Click to expand...

...and quite a price tag :D
 
Fix the finder on the M3, or find another M3, but don't replace the finder with one from a later camera- the M3's finder is not only has higher magnification than all later versions, but it was much better designed.

Brightness of given finder aside, if you like shooting with the 50mm lens on the M3, you will be disappointed by the finders in later cameras. They all show cluttered framelines, lower magnification, and a propensity to flare. The M3 has none of these faults. Get it fixed.
 
CopperB said:
...and quite a price tag :D
Click to expand...

... and quite a high price tag :eek:

I used to have an M3 and M4-P in parallel, both were in excellent condition and a perfect match. The M3 really shines when using 50mm (if the RF patch still shines ... ) while the M4-P was perfect for 35 and very usable for 50mm, too. :)
 
Gabor is right in saying that it is important for a M's VF to be bright, clear and possessing a contrasty patch. For myself, this is more than just important with a RF, it is essential to my enjoyment in shooting a RF. If I were in your shoes, I would think the key is to get the VF fixed or replaced. Both options will work, with the fixing option being the best for retaining your M3's value -- if that would be a consideration down the road. Another local guy to you to do the repair/cleaning or replacement is Gerry at Kindermann. He is top notch.
 
To me, the difference of looks among Leica M bodies are not significant enough to base my choice. Don't get me wrong, I care a lot about how my camera looks :)

I think if you like the M3 viewfinder, which means you most likely are a 50mm guy, then it'll make more sense to repair it.

For me, I'll stick with my M4-P because it's the best rangefinder camera for 35mm, value-wise.
 
I'd send it to Gerry at Kindermann before I'd send it across the border or over the seas. You can't do better than Gerry.

Fred
 
Last edited:
The info re Gerry at Kindermann's is what I need. Thanks. I've popped off an email to him.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom