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
Juan Valdenebro said:
:D
Well, if you already got that 28 3.5 and that 28 external finder, all you really need is the R3... A or M, both will do it!
Or get an MP or a black M2 instead: you choose!
That's what I've told myself for years, and I got no MP nor black M2... :)
Good luck to your wallet!
Cheers,
Juan
Click to expand...
Juan, Juan, Juan, I have just put an offer on the R3A with grip, strap, softies, etc.….now I will sit back nervously and wait. I am in the lap of the Gods now my friend, :eek:
 
stillshunter said:
Juan, Juan, Juan, I have just put an offer on the R3A with grip, strap, softies, etc.….now I will sit back nervously and wait. I am in the lap of the Gods now my friend, :eek:
Click to expand...

I'm glad for you...
By the way, I use the grip on the R3A and it's nice both for holding it and for the way the camera hangs with it... You'll enjoy it for sure!
Cheers,
Juan
 
I'm with most of you here: I like the Barnacks for their size, weight and looks and because they are excellent shooters delivering those wonderful classic-styled images when fitted with the contemporary lenses (says the man with 13 Barnacks in the display cabinet ;)
M's are easier to handle though, beautiful too, but with less of the classic appeal that the Barnacks have (says the man with 11 Ms and a CL in the cabinet :)).
 
My IIIa is lovely, and in many ways nicer than an M. But equally, my Ms have vastly better viewfinders and take a much wider range of better lenses. This makes it easier, at least for me, to take better pictures.

Cheers,

R.
 
I had a IIa with Elmar 50/3,5 coated. Wonderful camera, but the double viewfinder wasn't so fast. Now MP, wonderful too, bigger, but easier.
 
What can I say? I held my M3 in one hand and my Bessa L in the other. Then I held my Leica kit up with one hand and my CV kit with the other.

So I sold the Leica.

I really liked my M outfit but one body and three lenses was just too much to carry comfortably. Still, I did get more money back than I paid for it. :D
 
I have plenty of LTM cameras, both "Barnack" style & later, more modernized types from Canon, Nicca, etc. I greatly prefer any M model, & "modern" LTM bodies like the Canon P, for pure usability. However, for those on a budget, most LTM cameras are a relatively affordable platform for the huge universe of LTM lenses, & they're still fun & capable shooters. AFAIK, the only practical advantage of the Barnack-type bodies is their small size, but I find them interesting from an aesthetic/industrial design & historical perspective.
 
I have both M3 and IIIf. I voted the truth, that I like them equally, but the M3 takes my 'best' lenses (DR summicron and superangulon) so it is the one I would keep if I could only retain one.
 
I started with IIf and IIc, inherited my father's IIIf when he passed away. I sold the IIIf pretty quickly (it was too much of a 'sacred object' for me to keep and use, no one else wanted it). While I keep the IIs until they were lost, an M3 and M2 I'd acquired in the late '70s were much more useful and pleasant to use.

I'd like a 1930s generation Leica II (in black with an Elmar) just for the nostalgia, because I think it's pretty, but when it comes to Leica M-mount cameras I think the M4-2 and CL are what I'm most comfortable with using.

G
 
The main advantage to the "schraubgewinde" Leicas is the 1.5x magnification RF. IIIa was my first RF - I got used to the enlarged view and now I find I can not use an RF with less than 1:1 magnification. I can use an M3, but the M2-type .72 family of finders and I do not get along.

I lusted after an M when I could not afford one. Now I can afford one, and I have tried a few. I have found (like Mr. Spock) "The wanting is sometimes better than the having. It is not logical, but it is true."

I use a painted, post-war IIIc with a SOOBI 5cm BL finder. Usually with a Nokton 50/1.5 - sometimes with a clean Summitar. The RF has been redone with a modern beamsplitter by Youxin Ye. And I love my Kodak Medalist with it's separate, magnified RF. A thing of beauty is a joy forever.
 
I really like them both.

Barnack cameras and lenses are generally less expensive, at least that's what I have found. The LTM cameras I have bought seem to have been used a lot less than the M cameras.

Perhaps when the M3 came out the Barnack went into the sock drawer!
 
Since a lot of my photography is now cam-on-tripod, I'll probably scratch my LTM itch by mounting an Elmar 3.5/50 on my M3. I tried out a IIf for a weekend, but had to return it. I still yearn for that little camera. It was so jewel-like!
 
The Barnack Leicas are superb machines, built to the finest quality standards, and an exercise in precision to use. But there were reasons that Leitz came up with the M's and subsequently discontinued the screwmount cameras.

The M viewfinders are infinitely better. It's just not a matter of convenience: I will get shots with an M that I will miss with a Barnack because of the time spent in framing and focusing with the dinky little separate VF and RF. Based on years of experience with the M series, Leitz had the chance to update the Barnacks with a good combined VF/RF and a back door for easier film loading in the IIIG and didn't do it. And of course, I can still use all my screwmount lenses.

I will have to agree with many of the thoughts posted here about the wonderful little Bessas. I have both an M4 and a Bessa 3A, and I suspect I use the Bessa twice as much as the M4

Cheers,
Dez
 
I love them one and all.

Most used camera is still the ZI. What the M3 should have evolved to.

Closing on the ZI, my most used Leica this year, based on total frames, is the M9.

Followed closely by the Leica Null.

After that, by the Leica M3.
 
Dez said:
The Barnack Leicas are superb machines, built to the finest quality standards, and an exercise in precision to use. But there were reasons that Leitz came up with the M's and subsequently discontinued the screwmount cameras.

The M viewfinders are infinitely better. It's just not a matter of convenience: I will get shots with an M that I will miss with a Barnack because of the time spent in framing and focusing with the dinky little separate VF and RF. Based on years of experience with the M series, Leitz had the chance to update the Barnacks with a good combined VF/RF and a back door for easier film loading in the IIIG and didn't do it. And of course, I can still use all my screwmount lenses.

I will have to agree with many of the thoughts posted here about the wonderful little Bessas. I have both an M4 and a Bessa 3A, and I suspect I use the Bessa twice as much as the M4

Cheers,
Dez
Click to expand...

I have only owned the Barnack type -- a IIIf. I also have a Bessa T which s a bit more modern as Juan has described and takes M lenses--of which I have just one. a CV Nokton 35/1.4.

The Bessa is a really a good camera, nicely designed and solid but also light weight. The IIIf is just . . . well, wonderful--especially with the collapsible Elmar lens. Just a beautiful example of industrial design--compact, well proportioned, solid and really SMALL . . .I love it.

I am tempted by the M's viewfinder, but so far haven't bitten. I've gotten my hands on a M6. It's heavier and a bit of a brick -- I thought :eek: ---what am I saying?--But maybe the smooth operation and great viewfinder makes up for that. None of the Ms have 1/2000 or built in light meter on the camera body, features i appreciate on the Bessa T.
 
Dez said:
But there were reasons that Leitz came up with the M's and subsequently discontinued the screwmount cameras.
Click to expand...

Subsequently?! Leitz continued to make screwmount cameras for SIX [edit] years after the M's were introduced! And by that time, the M itself was being supplanted (with pros, in any case) by the Nikon F.

For that reason, I don't believe it's self evident that the M was "vastly superior" for every customer. It was certainly a bit more convenient and it had a major "conspicuous consumption" factor...

A heretical notion around here, but the M doesn't really make better pictures than a IIIg... it's just a little ... easier. Well, until the more modern lenses came out in M mount only - but to paraphrase one of people's complaints about Apple - that was just Leitz "forcing you to upgrade."

Don't get worked up over what I just said. Just me being goofy. :angel:
 
Yes, Leitz continued to make screwmount cameras and lenses for a long time after the M3 was well established. Why? Because they could sell them at a lower price.

Photographers are always looking for a lower-priced Leica. ;-)

G
 
Well, you all will just have to respect that my non-rational reasons for preferring a Barnack over an M are just as valid as your non-rational reasons for preferring an M over some actual modern picture-making device. ;>)

People who love the 356 series Porsche will make the same arguments about the 911. The heart wants what the heart wants.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom