Toccata
Member
I have an iiic and had until recently an m9. Going over my files I found I kept almost 70% more shots from the iiic. This was the deciding, but not only, factor that lead to my decision to sell the m9. I planned to pick up the Mono, but have since decided against it and am now looking to just keep to film for my off the clock shooting.
The iiic has been an absolute dream for my photography. It has helped me to reset my style as it imposes a break from the habits I've picked up from doc shooting.
I'm looking to add 35mm back and am now considering an m2 or m4. I don't care for the extraneous framelines of the m6 and don't need the meter.
I've noticed that many prefer the m2 for a wide angle meterless body but I'm not certain as to why.
I tend to be rough with my gear (though I've absolutely babied my barnack!), and am concerned that a good knock will kill the rangefinder assembly of the m2. Not sure if this should be a concern.
Would love to read feedback from folks that have used both or made a similar decision.
Ciao!
The iiic has been an absolute dream for my photography. It has helped me to reset my style as it imposes a break from the habits I've picked up from doc shooting.
I'm looking to add 35mm back and am now considering an m2 or m4. I don't care for the extraneous framelines of the m6 and don't need the meter.
I've noticed that many prefer the m2 for a wide angle meterless body but I'm not certain as to why.
I tend to be rough with my gear (though I've absolutely babied my barnack!), and am concerned that a good knock will kill the rangefinder assembly of the m2. Not sure if this should be a concern.
Would love to read feedback from folks that have used both or made a similar decision.
Ciao!