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 just picked up a superb nikkor-h 5cm f/2 in LTM today and it is a little cracker of a lens. I don;t much prefer 50mm so a Leica lens wouldn't be good for me, but this one is a nice and cheap little edition to my kit.
 
mcfingon said:
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
Click to expand...


Nice setup! The black Leica III looks great
 
I like my 1f for its small size and low weight. For these points I do prefer it, but its lack of rangefinder makes it a bit limited...


46083643914_908ce29d8e_c.jpg
 
p.giannakis said:
What is the lens on it?
Click to expand...

Pan,

it's the nickel Voigtländer Heliar 50mm 2.0 in LTM mount. Only 600 made, very sharp and very nicely constructed. A future collectible I'd say. Somehow they never sold quick, I think Stephen still has them in stock. I got mine from him some five, six years ago.
 
Your Nickel 50/2 looks very beautiful, Johan. I have the older version black Heliar 50/2. Optically, they may be identical.
 
DavidC said:
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.
Click to expand...

I have a IIIf with a new (well now three year old) beam splitter and I find it very easy to focus - and I've always wondered whether it might actually be easier to focus than a M. Always wanted a M2 or M6, but never pulled the trigger. At my age with my eyesight perhaps I should leave well enough alone?
 
traveler_101 said:
I have a IIIf with a new (well now three year old) beam splitter and I find it very easy to focus - and I've always wondered whether it might actually be easier to focus than a M. Always wanted a M2 or M6, but never pulled the trigger. At my age with my eyesight perhaps I should leave well enough alone?
Click to expand...

I do find the Ms to be easier to focus in low light, even after I had the beam-splitter replaced on my II.
 
I like them both equally.

I have owned and used a Leica II, and now a Leica IIIf RD ST. Since I mostly shoot black and white film and process it and scan it myself, the glass available for screw mount is more than adequate. Right now my IIIf is wedded to a collapsible Summicron and I do not see that changing any time soon. From portraits to landscapes I am happy very happy with that lens. Youxin did miracles for the IIIf body and it is super smooth. With the SBOOI finder, I do not feel like I am making any compromises with the screw mount camera.

Ah, but the M. I have owned and used two M4s, an M2, a digital M-P, and an M3. I have used the very best and newest glass like the 50 Summilux ASPH, 21mm Super-Elmar ASPH, and 35 Summicron ASPH, and I have used rigid Summicrons, DR Summicrons, 90mm 2.8 Elmarits, and 21mm Super-Angulons. The newer glass is lovely on the digital M, but a bit silly for black and white film. I let go of most of the newer lenses and now I use a DS M3 from 1956 with a Rigid Summicron and the newer E46 90mm Elmarit.

The thing about the LTM is that trimming film is annoying. The thing about the M is that by comparison it is a whale. Both are are beautiful machines both to use and to behold.

If I could only keep one, though, it would be the IIIf RD ST.
 
FBbe9IZ.jpg





I've had a Leica M2 and a Leica IIIa and I'll be completely honest. I had way more fun with the IIIa than the M2. I got rid of the M2 and the IIIa and I regret not keeping the IIIa way more. I used both with the 3.5cm Elmar.
 
I like them equally but then the LTM with a SBOOI-finder mounted (brightline 50mm).

Leica IA 1928, Elmar 50mm f/3.5 uncoated, 400-2TMY, printed on ADOX MCC 110.

Erik.

49306236513_8f4a943a41_b.jpg
 
Erik van Straten said:
I like them equally but then the LTM with a SBOOI-finder mounted (brightline 50mm).
Click to expand...

Erik, I agree completely. I actually prefer framing with the SBOOI than with the frame lines in my M3 viewfinder. The SBOOI is a phenomenal (pun intended!) piece of kit.

Life looks brighter through the SBOOI.
 
Yes, a SBOOI turns your "primitive" LTM into a sophisticated piece of equipment.

If anybody has a SBOOI in black, please sell it to me, thank you.

Erik.
 
Have them both (III, IIIf, M3, M6), like them all equally.

If I were to have just one, it'd be the one I don't yet have: an M5 (they fit my hands better).
 
I love my m9, but on film i prefer the ltm body, now i found a promising leotax elite that is amazing. Can´t wait to test it in real use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom