Nothing, but that is the beauty of it. They introduced an old school design with a meter (something I've always wanted)... too expensive for me since I don't use a lot of film anymore. However, if film was my main thing, I'd probably own one.
loquax ludens
Well-known
I bought an M3. Sending check off for it today. I hope to be holding it in my hands by this time next week.
MC JC86
Negative Nancy.
nlubis
Well-known
Nice. A great start. (Yes I said start). 
steveyork
Well-known
Another plus for the more modern rangefinders is the clarity of the rangefinder patch. It just snaps together when focused in a way the older cameras don't. A CLA will improve the older camera, but not bring it up to the modern standards. This may not be a big deal with the M3, because of the 0.91 viewfinder mag. And as I wrote above, when using the old camera or the lower magnification viewfinder, just take a step or two closer.
loquax ludens
Well-known
I suspect I will really like my M3, as several of you have suggested. I hope I find it as satisfying to use as I imagine it will be.
I'm not entirely certain that the M3 will eliminate my desire to own and use an MP. It will certainly delay it while my checkbook recovers. In the meantime, I've ruled out an MP with a .58 viewfinder, so it's down to .72 and .85. I'm going to try to find a dealer around here who has both so I can see the difference for myself. I've been dreaming lately of a .85 in silver chrome ...
I'm not entirely certain that the M3 will eliminate my desire to own and use an MP. It will certainly delay it while my checkbook recovers. In the meantime, I've ruled out an MP with a .58 viewfinder, so it's down to .72 and .85. I'm going to try to find a dealer around here who has both so I can see the difference for myself. I've been dreaming lately of a .85 in silver chrome ...
errorlogin
Love vintage Hifi, too!
I am sure, you will like the M3.
The matter with the MP in comparison to M3 for me is just: Do you like the built in meter or not....
I was thinking about buying an MP too but was not sure about that point. So I bought an M6 (cheaper) before to find this out.
Well, I have to say, I do not like it at all. I really prefer a hand hold meter of even the old Leicameter. I need to measure (or guess) BEFORE I look through the finder.
For me, it's faster this way and I did not like the LEDs in low light situations.
I will stay with my M3 and M2. MP without batteries = M3 without selftimer for me.
Jan.
The matter with the MP in comparison to M3 for me is just: Do you like the built in meter or not....
I was thinking about buying an MP too but was not sure about that point. So I bought an M6 (cheaper) before to find this out.
Well, I have to say, I do not like it at all. I really prefer a hand hold meter of even the old Leicameter. I need to measure (or guess) BEFORE I look through the finder.
For me, it's faster this way and I did not like the LEDs in low light situations.
I will stay with my M3 and M2. MP without batteries = M3 without selftimer for me.
Jan.
Mackinaw
Think Different
I'm surprised were still having the M6 vs. MP argument. To quote Erwin Puts:
"The MP is not the classical M6 with some M3 details added. Knowing the Leica people's drive for perfection, one would be surprised if they would not find areas for improvement. The important new fine grained bodycover has already mentioned.
Internally TTL electronics are new. The M6 electronics were a hybrid design and the mechanical/electronical interface was partly done by analogue electrical means. Now the electronics are fully digital (as in the M7) and have improved reliability and a lower battery consumption. There is now a battery warning signal to the right of the exposure diodes.
The shutter curtains are more light tight and the occasional light leaks of the older shutter curtains are now extinct. Even more important is the improved mechanical geometry of the shutter. As has been explained in the M7 review the shutter curtains have an acceleration and deceleration moment, when speed is building up and the curtain mass must be braked. Here we have an area of variable geometry and a careful redesign of the rollers and springs and braking elements has resulted in a very even movement over the travel length. Occasionally users have noted very small darker bands at the sides of the frame as a result of the shutter movement being too slow at the start and stop moments. With the new design there should be no problem.
The rewind knob has a very useful friction now. Every Leica user has experienced the following: you rewind the film and halfway your fingers slip. Then the force of the curled film pulls the rewound part back and you have to start all over. The MP rewind knob has been designed with an inherent friction that is equal to the film force. Now you can remove your fingers from the knob and the film stays where it is. I did try it during my test of the camera and it works.
Gears and other moving parts have been improved by a new shape and surface treatment, which will increase the mean time before failure and enhances the smoothness of the operation. The current manufacturing procedures and assembly methods allow for a slight tolerance in the selection of matching parts and some users, when comparing the M6 or M7 with a finely tuned M3 will notice a certain roughness when transporting the film or pressing the two way shutter release. With the MP there is no such thing: all operations are extremely smooth and in direct comparison to my M3 even show improvements in smoothness and noise reduction. I checked several MP models and all were alike.
The viewfinder has been improved too. The well-known flaring of the rangefinder patch under adverse light conditions since the M4-2 has been eliminated completely. As I am very sensitive to this phenomenon I compared my M7 in identical situations to the MP and could indeed notice that the MP has not the slightest propensity to flare where the M7 shows stray light in the finder patch. The technical solution is to enlarge the hole in the reflective mirror and add a lens element to the frameline holder. This is a most welcome improvement. Technically it can be fitted to older and current models and here Leica should make a clear statement."
Read his review here :
http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/MP/page28.html
"The MP is not the classical M6 with some M3 details added. Knowing the Leica people's drive for perfection, one would be surprised if they would not find areas for improvement. The important new fine grained bodycover has already mentioned.
Internally TTL electronics are new. The M6 electronics were a hybrid design and the mechanical/electronical interface was partly done by analogue electrical means. Now the electronics are fully digital (as in the M7) and have improved reliability and a lower battery consumption. There is now a battery warning signal to the right of the exposure diodes.
The shutter curtains are more light tight and the occasional light leaks of the older shutter curtains are now extinct. Even more important is the improved mechanical geometry of the shutter. As has been explained in the M7 review the shutter curtains have an acceleration and deceleration moment, when speed is building up and the curtain mass must be braked. Here we have an area of variable geometry and a careful redesign of the rollers and springs and braking elements has resulted in a very even movement over the travel length. Occasionally users have noted very small darker bands at the sides of the frame as a result of the shutter movement being too slow at the start and stop moments. With the new design there should be no problem.
The rewind knob has a very useful friction now. Every Leica user has experienced the following: you rewind the film and halfway your fingers slip. Then the force of the curled film pulls the rewound part back and you have to start all over. The MP rewind knob has been designed with an inherent friction that is equal to the film force. Now you can remove your fingers from the knob and the film stays where it is. I did try it during my test of the camera and it works.
Gears and other moving parts have been improved by a new shape and surface treatment, which will increase the mean time before failure and enhances the smoothness of the operation. The current manufacturing procedures and assembly methods allow for a slight tolerance in the selection of matching parts and some users, when comparing the M6 or M7 with a finely tuned M3 will notice a certain roughness when transporting the film or pressing the two way shutter release. With the MP there is no such thing: all operations are extremely smooth and in direct comparison to my M3 even show improvements in smoothness and noise reduction. I checked several MP models and all were alike.
The viewfinder has been improved too. The well-known flaring of the rangefinder patch under adverse light conditions since the M4-2 has been eliminated completely. As I am very sensitive to this phenomenon I compared my M7 in identical situations to the MP and could indeed notice that the MP has not the slightest propensity to flare where the M7 shows stray light in the finder patch. The technical solution is to enlarge the hole in the reflective mirror and add a lens element to the frameline holder. This is a most welcome improvement. Technically it can be fitted to older and current models and here Leica should make a clear statement."
Read his review here :
http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/MP/page28.html
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
errorlogin
Love vintage Hifi, too!
True, and no plastic parts like the MP.
MC JC86
Negative Nancy.
Big piece of injection molded carp that it is.
loquax ludens
Well-known
I have read that modern Leitz lenses have plastic parts, but what parts in an MP are plastic? I thought they were all metal.
Mudman
Well-known
My M3 is brighter and more clear then my M6TTL .85 model. And no flare (kind of annoying on occasion with the M6).
rpilottx
Established
I think you made the right choice with the M3. If you miss a meter, I have had good luck with the VCII meter on either the M2 or M4. Of course, it makes using an aux finder a drag.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
As if using an aux finder wasn't already a drag.
I'ts OK, but it's not ideal. I have other cameras, so use my M3 for 50mm or longer (a frequent occurrence, and one I like). YMMV, of course. My way isn't the right way, except for me.
...Mike
errorlogin
Love vintage Hifi, too!
The middle rangefinder window is plastic, isn't it? Like at the M2, M6...
Maybe the part of the fast loader on the bottom part too. I am not sure. Or did they change it to metal? I don't believe so.
I also cannot understand, why Leica uses a mixture of Phillips Screws and normal ones: Phillips Screws on the mount, the inner bottom, the bottom plate and the inner rear. Normal screws for the time changer, the rewind lever on front, the mount release and the screw that covers the patch adjustment.
To mix these two types of screws is a very bad idea, if you want to (re)-create a true classical camera. :bang: I cannot understand Leica.
If they REALLY want to built THE BEST, no compromise mechanical camera, they should not do such things.
Also: If you look closely to the MP classic and the MP3: You will notice that the engraved "4" on the time lever is cutted off by the hole for the Leicameter. On the M3 and M2 the engraved "4" is moved a little bit towards the "8", in order that it is NOT cut off so brutally by the hole. If you look closely, the "4" at the M3 and M2 is not "where it should be". Just that it is not destroyed by the hole. Leica do not care about this little detail at the new cameras any more.....
This is just another small detail why the old Leicas are better built in my eyes.
Just my 2 cents....and sorry for my english, hope you will understand what I mean.
Regards, Jan.
Last edited:
haempe
Well-known
Jan,
I do not think Leica wanted to build a true classic camera with the MP, but the best possible mechanical camera.
Therefore, the Phillips screw. As far as I know, can only to this screws the force during tightening be measured.
About MP Classic and MP3:
Perhaps they could have more effort on these models. But I think, you can easily change the knob in an old M2/3/4 one.
But the Leica "Limited Editions Policy" is another story and not of interest for me. I'm not a collector.
peter_n
Veteran
If you keep the M3 you may lean to getting a 0.72x mag MP if you compare. Although others here have no problem using a 35mm lens on a 0.85x mag body I do; there isn't enough room around the 35mm frameline, at least for my eye.
Mudman
Well-known
The .85 mag is difficult for 35mm with glasses on.
loquax ludens
Well-known
I read somewhere that the new camera covering material is a synthetic fabric that incorporates plastic too. I can no longer find the source for that assertion. That might be a good use of plastic, if true. Vulcanite doesn't age all that well.
Perfectly.