Can't afford a Leica M3.......

FalseDigital said:
I love my Bessa R! I prefer it over Leica anyway. The viewfinder is unbeatable!! If you've got a little extra cash go for the R2 (because then you can use M mount lenses) but honestly....I couldn't be happier with another rangefinder.
Click to expand...

The R is undoubtedly a nice camera, but in the Bessa line only the R3 has a magnification that compares with (beats!) the M3.
 
In the UK you could definitely get an M3 and a cheap lens for the equivalent of $700 USD. I've seen user M3s available from dealers for around £350. I paid less for mine, but that was ebay. I also picked up a bashed-up Summar (but the glass is decent) for about £70. Total: about £400 - £450 (i.e. 650-700 USD approx)

A year down the line I had to pay for a service, but I'd have struggled to get a Bessa R3 and Voigtlander lens for the same price, even once I paid for the service.
 
The Leica M3 is the best Leica M period! Every Leica after has a lousier viewfinder, less accurate frames. Flare viewfinders from the M4 onwards. The cleanest finder, is the M2.
No Leica has better frames for 90mm and 135mm. 35mmWide-angle may need the gggles or added viewfinder, but some like Akiva, use without.To think the M3 is a 50mm only is really silly. I've used(abused) mine since 1967.It was brand new.The 90mm frame is so big. Totally useable.
There will be M3's for your money. A good 50mm you are set! Buying substitute ain't gonna do it. The Leica CL is not reliable. Some were OK but generally not a good idea.
The Nikon S2 is a great camera. Practically indestructible.The lenses are often better than comparative Leica of same period..The finder darker, less lenses available and the RF focus works quite different from a M.The Nikon almost never suffers light leaks.
A RF does not rely on a whole heap of lenses. That's modern thinking and good marketing! Two more lenses maximum but only after you use the M3 for at least ONE YEAR.
Buying cheaper cameras a bad idea. Almost no resale value. The Barnack cameras are really nice. Loading a torture. They really are for 50mm. The photos i see folks make with them are magic. Go figger!
Good luck!
 
Last edited:
There is nothing like an M body. As suggested here by some I started with a Bessa. I never liked it, then went to a IIIa which I like but focus was a pain. I then went to the M3. I gave $550.00 for it and eventually bought an M6 I still have. I would suggest a user M3 and if nothing else a Jupiter lens. $700.00 is very workable.
 
M4-2: more modern, a much underestimated Leica. M2 maybe, but you need to know more about buying second hand than with an M4-2. I once looked through an M3 viewfinder. I put it back on the table and let out a long sigh of relief. I just do not want one of those at all.
 
Hi,

Why not the M or M3 body and a Jupiter 8 for the time being. A J-8 that's been used on a Leica can be sold and sell well, although prices are not Leica like.

Regards, David

PS of course, there's always the overlooked f/2.8 50mm Elmar for the M2 or 3 - nothing like Summicron prices but nice, or a Summitar and adapter.
 
I have recently bought a Leica M5 plus Jupiter-8 for 450Euro.

The Jupiter-8 exceeded all expectations, and the M5 is very nice if you can cope with the larger size. And its metered... And it has an excellent finder.
 
Also you will never lose money on an M body. You can sell it later and most likely get every dime you paid for it. not so with a Bessa.
 
You could get an M4-P or M4-2 for around $600 if you're patient and keep your eyes open. I think I saw a decent quality M4-P for around that amount within the last month. Then pick up a Jupiter-8 for <$50 and an M-mount adapter and you're sorted in the short term.

Otherwise, a Canon P with a Canon 35mm f/2.0 or f/2.8 (or 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 if you want the 50mm focal length) would be fine, though it's not a Leica!

Another option you may want to consider is getting something like a Canonet GIII QL17 (which has a great 40mm f/1.7 lens) for around $50-60 or so, then save the rest of your money until you have enough for the Leica. I'd recommend this option to fill your short-term needs & the Canonet is a really good camera with a nice & sharp lens on it.

That way, you have something to shoot now and also make sure you save and buy the camera you really want (the Leica) down the track. Otherwise, you're likely to have a nagging voice in your head reminding you about the Leica & you'll probably end up buying it anyway!
 
I started with a Bessa T and a CV 35mm lens. It was a great setup but it wasn't the real thing. In fact, it only made me want the real thing..

There are a number of good suggestions here, a Leica IIIC or F, Canon P, Leica CL or CLE, or watch the market for a M body. The barnacks are fun to use and are cheap.
The M3 is nice if 50mm will be your main lens.
I would look around for a M2 or M4-2 or M4-P or an even an M5.
It may take time but an M is worth the wait.
 
ferider said:
A good Canon P with clean 50/1.4 should run you around US 500. Very, very close to an M3. Great lens, 1:1 finder, quiet.
Click to expand...

+1. Roland beat me to it. A Canon P comes closest to an M3 b/c of the 1:1 finder. As an alternative to the Canon 50/1.4, look at the Canon 50/1.8, which can be had for $200 or less.
 
How about a CL and Jupiter 8 for about 400????

Found on the unnameable auction site from a dealer in the UK. With warranty and returns possible!

That would leave me some room for further improvements and less trouble with my dear wife!!
 
PatrickT said:
For the M3 experience on a budget, definitely a Canon P + whatever Canon LTM lens. The P is a fantastic camera.
Click to expand...

The Canon P is a very nice camera, but it is not the M3 experience on a budget: for starters, you can't mount M lenses on the Canon P. The Canon P, like the Bessa R, doesn't "automatically" switch framelines accordingly, and is much easier to load film into than the M3. Then there's that nice heft and buttery feel when you wind the film in the M3 not quite present in the Canon P.

The M3 experience on a budget is either a cheaper M3, or an M2.
 
Kodak Retina III S!
Lenses:
4,0 28mm - 2,8 35mm - 2,8 50mm - 1,9 50mm - 4,0 85mm - 4,0 135mm

You can get all for your 700,-$ and have some spare money too!
Build in meter - frames in the finder for 35-135mm appear with changing the lens - like the Leica M3. Flash sync. at any speed up to 1/500sec.
Lenses made by Schneider-Kreuznach or Rodenstock!

So why saving money for a Leica when you can have a Retina for less then a 3rd?

8300909372_df75ec9072_c.jpg
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
The Canon P is a very nice camera, but it is not the M3 experience on a budget: for starters, you can't mount M lenses on the Canon P. The Canon P, like the Bessa R, doesn't "automatically" switch framelines accordingly, and is much easier to load film into than the M3. Then there's that nice heft and buttery feel when you wind the film in the M3 not quite present in the Canon P.

The M3 experience on a budget is either a cheaper M3, or an M2.
Click to expand...
Exactly my reaction.

Cheers,

R.
 
MiniMoke said:
How about a CL and Jupiter 8 for about 400????

Found on the unnameable auction site from a dealer in the UK. With warranty and returns possible!

That would leave me some room for further improvements and less trouble with my dear wife!!
Click to expand...

If you really want an M3 you should settle for nothing less. I can point you to an M3 priced £379 with a UK dealer if you like. No doubt they take returns if you are not satisfied for any reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom