About to take the plunge

[laverda3c]

Hey Folks,

I am about to take the plunge into the world of rangefinders. I have used this forum to educate myself about the bewildering choice of bodies and lenses. However I am unclear what would be best for my needs. I intend to focus (ignore the pun) on the wide angle side of photography shooting landscapes and environmental portraits as well as street style exclusively in black and white.

I have narrowed my choice of equipment down to either a M5 or screw mount with a CV 28/1.9. The choice of an M5 is due to it having a meter and being cheaper than an early M6. As to which SM I am interested in, I am open to suggestions. It seems that the price of a IIIg is nearly the same as a M5 but IIIfs are much cheaper.

My concern with the older screw mount cameras is reliability. Which leads me to my questions.

1) Are the SM cameras up to the daily use?

2) How difficult is it to manage the metering (with an external meter - which I have not used before)?

3) How difficult is to to focus with the range finder and compose with a seperate finder?

4) Or should I go completely (off my rocker) and back to basics and get a used Leica O? (My current main camera is a Rollei 40 SE so guestimate focus isn't new)

5) Any other suggestions for camera would be appreciated. I compared a Bessa R and R2 to a M7 at a local camera store and the difference in shutter sound and feel is steering me to the Leicas.

😕

advTHANKSance,

Mark

 

[dcsang]

Wow.. lots of stuff to consider here Mark 🙂

First, welcome to the forum 🙂

Let's see, I'll try to toss in my comments accordingly to your post...

1) yes the screwmounts are up to daily use. I have a IIIc that I have used consistently since I got it back in mid/late November.

2) Metering is not a problem, get yourself the Voigtlander VC Meter II if you can and it's a breeze (and a lot easier to carry around) than some of the larger hand helds.

3) This really depends on how clear the RF is in the older body that you'd purchase. Mine's not too bad - but it is yellowing a bit but I've seen a IIIc that has a bright clear patch and would be a joy to use. It's not too difficult to flip b/w the two (RF and VF) but if you're not using a 50mm lens, then don't even bother with the VF since it is meant to approximate the view of 50mm lenses.

4) Scale focussing can be used with 35mm lenses and even beyond if you get the right ones 🙂 it's not too hard to do as long as you stop down a bit (hehe) 🙂 If you want wide, the voigtlander 25mm lens is perfect for scale focussing. If you want wider, then the voigtlander 15mm or 12mm will do 🙂

5) As someone who has both M and screwmount cams the big difference is size. The IIIc is small enough, with a 35mm attached, to fit into my coat pocket. It's heavy, yes, but it fits nicely. The M3 is a bit larger and not as easily "pocketable".
If it's pricing you're looking at, M6's are not that expensive now and you can get decent M3's for a song. If you want screwmount bodies then I would strongly suggest a IIIc or a recently CLA'd IIIf - the IIIg's are great but cost as much as M class cams can.

Just my 2 cents 🙂 hope it helps a bit and again, welcome aboard 😀

Cheers
Dave

 

[bobofish]

First off, welcome!

We are a crazy bunch here, but on the whole, we're a little like the Pilsbury Dough Boy...if you poke our belly, we say "hoo-hoo!"

It was quite surprising to me to learn that I actually prefer an external meter, rather than an in-camera one. I like to compose my shots largely in my head, and simply bring the camera up to take the shot...I didn't know how used to the extra top camera meter readout on my Eos I had gotten (that's bad English) until I picked up an older Nikon body...it's really a different experience, and somewhat more intuitive to "read" a situation with what the meter says, and unobtrusively raise the camera to the eye to snap and be done with it.

Therefore, my suggestion to you is to think about forgetting the M5 (since they're a bit spendy these days) and think about an m4 or even an m3 with external finders.

I believe I read that you like landscape photography...many people shoot landscapes just like street photography, in which case the external meter would be very helpful indeed, rather than a handicap. Voigtlander offers a shoe-mount one for a very reasonable price, and of course there's millions of fine hand-held meters.

Personally I'd stay away from the screw mount cameras, since first of all they mostly have older, somewhat out of date lenses...for landscapes that could be a great thing, but I think you may eventually decide you don't like the handicap. These days there's a wide variety of excellent M lenses from Zeiss, Cosina, Leica and the like...I like to have widely compatible cameras, and so I'd steer you to the M. Not to mention the much better finders, more accurate rangefinders, etc.

If nothing else of course, an M camera easily takes screw mount lenses...the other way round is not so easy, if not impossible.

 

[schmoozit]

I think separate finders for street and even environmental portraits might not be too hot. I really didn't like using that setup, though I love shooting wide open, so even a slight movement could goof the focus. If you are shooting very wide lenses, however, you'll be saved by the greater DOF, which is good because you'd be forced into a separate finder in that case.

 

[rpsawin]

Mark,

If you have ruled out the Bessa's and are leaning toward a Leica I would suggest looking at an M-2. It it meterless, has no electronics (manual) and shows three individual framelines: 35 50 90. You have to use an external finder for lenses other than a 35, 50 or 90.

I use an M-2 for B&W landscape, seascape and industrial shooting with a Clip on CV meter. Frankly, I love this camera. It is my favorite shooter. It is solid, reliable, uncluttered and just a joy to use. I also use an M-6, Hexar, CV R & an R2. All of them are great shooters, but the M-2 is my favorite. I also carry a Sekonic handheld meter for more demanding exposures.

This is just my less than humble opinion and I hope it helps.

Bob

 

[aad]

If you actually own a Laverda 3C, then you should have a Leica IIIc (or IIIf, despite the lack of poetry). The feel is great, I use mine literally every day. The viewfinder won't match, but I think you'll be able to guesstimate quickly.

I had a 3C years ago-Jota-ised at 28,000 miles, sold it at 75,000 miles. Still miss it.

 

[Frank Granovski]

I had a Laverda 1000. I put lots of miles on that bike. I liked my Ducati 900 SS better. In those days I used a Voigtlander Vitomatic 11 for my Laverda/Ducatti travels. Now I have a 11b to fondle and kindle memories of those pleasant days.

 

[wilt]

Welcome to the forum!

Handheld metering is not difficult.

If you go with an M Leica, you'll have greater flexibility lenswise. Fully functional M2's and M3's but with cosmetics that comes naturally with use (and therefore scares the collectors away) are not that expensive and are very capable cameras.

Whatever you choose, have fun!

 

[richard_l]

The M5 is too expensive. I would suggest an M2. I have an M2, M3, and M6; and the M2 is my favorite.

For a 28mm landscape lens, I have the Ultron, and it is a fine lens, but I would prefer something more like the 28mm Zeiss Biogon ZM, which seems to have slightly less aggressive contrast. I tend to get blocked shadows with the Ultron. By the way, depending on the scene, 28mm can be pretty wide, and what looks like a breathtaking view may appear anemic in the photo, with puny, diminutive landscape features. I prefer 40 or 50mm for most natural landscapes here in NC.

With the M2 and 28mm Ultron you would probably like to have a 28mm viewfinder. The metal Voigtlander finder works very well.

For metering it is nice to have the option of incident or reflected. When in doubt, I sometimes use both, and for this the Sekonic L308 is excellent. It is highly accurate and easy to use.

 

[MCTuomey]

Merciful has a user M2 for sale that's mechanically very good (recent CLA), if you're inclined to a meterless M camera. (yes, this is a plug - for a very interesting FMer - i have no relation to him.)

I second Bob's suggestion to go with an M2. If you want a internal meter, then the M5 is a fine choice since the user models are still priced quite a bit under the M6 bodies. No doubt that the M series is very flexible relative to lens use, but there are so many LTM lenses to sample you won't feel constrained if you go the screwmount body road.

You can't really make a mistake with any of the Leicas, SM or M. They are all variations on a theme, in a way. It's best to go first with your own inclination. You can always sell it later when your fancy moves you toward another body.

Good luck and welcome to the forum.

 

[ERV]

A Leica thread mount usually need a CLA, and a M5 is not that much cheaper than an M6. A VC Bessa is a budget option. I had a Bessa T for a while, however I sold it because the shutter was too loud, almost like a SLR.
I prefer camera bodies with on board meters, and use a VC2 meter on my Leica CL and IIc. It works great-I look down, meter, set the lens, raise to eye, focus, fire. Having a meter on top allows me to be more discreet since I can do this without having the camera up to my eye. If you want to use a wide lens and an external finder on a LTM then the meter has to go, or you need to use one of those double shoe bracket things.
An M5 or M6 with a built-in meter and frame lines makes things much simpler in my opinion. I have both and like them for different reasons. The M6 is lighter, more compact and slightly quieter. You can also collapse collapsible lenses into it, which is something you can't do with an M5.
On the other hand I really like seeing the shutter speeds in the finder and the oversize shutter speed dial of the M5 because I can change speeds while looking through the finder. It is a big camera, however the meter is more sensitive and intuitive than the two arrow diodes on the m6.
KEH has a couple of M5's on their site right now. Personally I like the three lug model because it hangs like a regular camera. I also think it's easier and faster to lift it up to the eye without having to turn the camera from vertical to horizontal, as is the case with a 2 lug.

Good luck making your choice- all Leicas have their fans and distinct advantages.

 

[laverda3c]

If you actually own a Laverda 3C, then you should have a Leica IIIc (or IIIf, despite the lack of poetry). The feel is great, I use mine literally every day. The viewfinder won't match, but I think you'll be able to guesstimate quickly.

I had a 3C years ago-Jota-ised at 28,000 miles, sold it at 75,000 miles. Still miss it.

It sure would be poetic to buy a IIIc. I hadn't thought of that connection. Unfortunately I no longer have the 3C - I too miss the Laverda (had a 750SF prior to the 3C as well).

I appreciate all the other advice I have received. Currently I have a M5 on hold pending inspection. Hopefully it passes muster and I will be sorted. If not then it is back to square one and I suspect a meterless M body will win out (strange to me that most people favour a M2 over any other M body - is it the simplicity or the less collectability I wonder).

Cheers,

Mark -%)

 

[richard_l]

.....(strange to me that most people favour a M2 over any other M body - is it the simplicity or the less collectability I wonder).....

Quality and convenience in use. All the Ms are simple and collectable.

 

[wilt]

then it is back to square one and I suspect a meterless M body will win out (strange to me that most people favour a M2 over any other M body - is it the simplicity or the less collectability I wonder).

Cheers,

Mark -%)

If you go the meterless route, perhaps you should think about what your next lens will be, after the 28. If you plan on using a 35 much, that's an argument in favor of the M2, which has the 35 frameline. However, if you intend to go to 50 or 85 or 90 after 28, the M3 is an alternative. It lacks the 35 framelines, but instead it has higher magnification in the viewfinder and thus more accurate focusing. Could come in handy with those longer lenses up close and wide open.