Leica LTM Anyone prefer their LTM to their M?

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses

Anyone prefer their LTM to their M?

  • I had/have both (M and LTM) and prefer the LTM

    Votes: 78 14.7%

  • I had/have both (M and LTM) and prefer the M

    Votes: 158 29.7%

  • I have both (M and LTM) and like them equally

    Votes: 161 30.3%

  • Only ever had an LTM and need look no further

    Votes: 77 14.5%

  • Only ever had an M and need look no further (was just here by accident or curiosity)

    Votes: 53 10.0%

  • I have no interest in either (M or LTM) - either prima facie or a priori

    Votes: 5 0.9%
  • Total voters
    532
I have my IIIc, 3.5/50 red scale Elmar, SBOOI along with either my M4 or M4-2. It all depends on what I'm going to do.
 
The C/V chrome 35mm finder makes my IIIb a pleasure to use with a Summaron 35. The RF is squinty but accurate, or I can just focus by scale. Leica M is an okay shooter, too. :)
 
I do love shooting with my IIIc but, realistically, it's considerably more 'hit and miss' than my MP which, for me anyway, is the perfect mechanical film rangefinder. On the other hand, people rarely stop me in the street when I'm using the MP, but people often come up and ask me about the IIIc.
 
Currently I own a Leica II (the eternal one, in my avatar) and a recently serviced black IIf that started life as a Standard. Also a very nice Zorki 1 that fellow RRF-er Daan gifted me.

Haven't had an M Leica in years and don't feel I want one either. Well, maybe a nice black paint M4...:rolleyes:
 
davidnewtonguitars said:
I had an interesting occurrence last week on vacation. I was carrying the Leica Standard with Summitar in my blue jeans pocket, and I found in several instances that the camera would wind on the film advance as I pulled the camera out of my pocket.
Click to expand...

And you think Oskar Barnack didn’t anticipate that?
 
I took my Rangefinder camera to San Antonio, TX this past weekend and was stopped various times to ask about my camera. Most other people had telephones or digital cameras taking pictures. The Rangefinder film camera draws attention if you want it.
 
Over the past decade my take on cameras has changed. I often travel with one camera & one lens. I don't obsess about having the widest range of lenses or the latest APO 'best' glass. Whether its the Deardorff with a Dagor lens, the Rolleiflex T, the Leica MP or the iii, I pick what i think is the best tool for the job & live with its limitations & mine. Photography for me, means a print out of a wet darkroom.I considered a (film) CL again with a Miyazaki Tessar....but even though i got great results with CL & CLE, back in the day, I never got the warm & fuzzy feeling of fine mechanical engineering with them. Lately my Iphone 6 has been replaced photographically by a Leica iii. The results i've gotten with the CV 28, Summaron 35 & CV 50 2.5 have been great. There's a jewel-like quality to the build of the earlier screwmount Leicas and the handling of these smaller cameras is terrific. As much as I have appreciated decades of M use.....I'm finding the iii to be a joy to use. As for imperfections, there's something to be said for getting fine results with a simple tool.
unnamed by Greg Yavorsky, on Flickr
 
I've had both in the past and no longer own either... emotionally the LTM cameras are very cool and awesome to play with. They feel great... BUT the M is more my style for actual photography. I cannot do that well with the separate rangefinder / viewfinder. I have always wished that Leica made a LTM camera with a combined RF/VF. How cool would that be? I just am not the scale focus type unless I'm using a camera that only offers scale focus like a Rollei 35.
 
Pardon my potential heresy but the Canon IVSB2 has a combined RF/VF, is a LTM bottom loader and is arguably the best of the Barnack type cameras. I have one, it's a bit bigger than my IIIc but is a very good camera. All that said I use my IIIc's much more than any other camera. Joe
 
The IVSB2 is, indeed, a wonderful camera. It also has a rangefinder patch that's yellow and much brighter than either my IIIa or my IIIc. The finder also has three settings, so you can use it for a 50, magnify it to approximately a 100, or take it another step to about 135. The two magnifications also make it easier to focus the Canon 1.5 50mm.
 
Not a Leica M/LTM so will skip those two latest comments :D

Seriously, they are good cameras. Canon lens are good as well, but overall, I prefer Leica LTM compactness.


Best regards

Marcelo
 
Reading this thread makes me feel like l am not alone as l wander around the hous carrying of of my barnacks as l give the shutter some exercise
 
The camera combo I'm using at the moment is a Leica III with 1950 Canon Serenar 50/1.9. Looking at lens schematics, the Serenar design appears very close to the pre-war Leitz Summar and even closer to the 1930's Schneider Xenon.
U51008I1539421704.SEQ.0.jpg

John Mc
 
I've pared down my camera ownership to the M2 & model ii, with a couple of Zorki's in the background. I probably carry the model ii more often because it is compact when bicycle riding, but shoot more film with the M2, because I carry it on "serious" photo outings. Neither is better, only different.
 
barnack for weight

barnack for weight

I have a IIIc and once the beam splitter was changed is actually easy to focus. But the biggest advantage is the lighter weight of this little rig which when it comes to the outdoors I tend to grab first.
If it's indoors shooting I'll grab the M7 anytime for its ease of use in low light and excellent exposure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom