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

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...
Not bad but... you'd be better off trying to get hold of a CL and its original 40mm if you can. I've owned and used a CL in the dim and distant past and its a very nice little camera but I'd certainly try to get the 40mm because its a lovely little lens, works correctly with the viewfinder and yes, you can add the 90mm C cheaply enough later on to complete the standard 'kit'. There are repairers who can still work on the CL I believe but its getting on so if possible do get a warranty on it.
 
Zopkuni said:
Agfa Ambil Silette is as good as any Leica its a fantastic rangefinder with interchangeable Lenses of top quality just as Zeiss and Leitz!
Click to expand...
Highly disputable. I've had both. I'd say the same about Werras: again, I've had 'em, and I think you are overrating them, especially the (slow, pedestrian) standard Tessar. There are reasons why Leicas cost so much and they ain't all snobbery.

Cheers,

R.
 
Zopkuni said:
Come on some of the best photographers never had ultra fast lenses, back in the 60s or 50s... ;-)
Click to expand...
Many did, though. And it depended on what they were photographing. By the 1960s, f/2.8 was regarded as unreasonably slow and very few good cameras were used with standard lenses that slow. Actually, even in the 50s, f/2 was not regarded as out of the way. Besides, the point really is that the cameras and lenses you refer to are not of Leica standard.

Cheers,

R.
 
Leica standard is a marketing gag :)
If you have some of the excellent russian Feds/Zorkis
(a working CLAed one) or Kneb/Kiev 4/5 you dont need a Leica,
and the Agfa Ambi Silette
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alf_sigaro/747049004/
is the smoothest camera I ever had,
and i had a Leica M3...
There were world famous professional Photographers using Agfa Ambi Silettes
on world travel!

For example Mr. Hilmar Pabel:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilmar_Pabel

https://www.google.de/search?hl=de&...urce=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=puELUY-SCYTKsgbp2oDIDg

I sold the Leica m3 because the pictures taken with it werent
a quark over the Agfa Solinar 2,8 or Werra 2,8 tessar taken pictures
Better, save the money, you spend for a Leica (or Contax)
and spend it in Film material. (My opinion,maybe you truly need the brandname...)
I wouldnt buy any hypeed camera...
I cant live with hyped products. (Also hate Apple products ;-) )

Here is a video about the nice Agfa Ambi Silette:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPBvZa-XaCw

If you have one you will see what Im talking about.
This is an overlooked German masterpiece.
 
Well, I've been using Leicas since 1969 and I don't see it as hype, though of course you are entitled to your opinion. Across a decade -- the minimum I've used any Leica except the ones I've acquired in the last decade (M8 and M9) -- the cost per year is not high. My M2 cost me so little, so long ago, that it's probably under $10 a year now. And Zorkiis and Kievs? Don't make me laugh. A good one is not bad. That's as far as I'd go.

Cheers,

R.
 
Well an Industar 2,8 / 50 Lanthanium, Jupiter and Helios lens are excellent!
Not only for the money (If you dont get a kitchen table - maladjusted one)
Try a good one and compare it to the best Leica lens you can find.
You wont laugh any longer! ;-)
Jupiter 3
1,5 / 50 (M39 or Contax mount)

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/...er-lenses-on-the-leica-m9-by-robert-chisholm/

is fast as hell and sharp as sharp can get ...
its wonderfull. A similar Zeiss Oberkochen or Leica lens would cost you an arm and
a leg. A good CLAd soviet camera is a wonderfull user.
And its a great conversation piece, there are also fantastic chinese cameras.
Best Leica ever built?
get a shanghai red flag 20 ;-)
But that thing sadly will be 10 times more expensive than a geniune Leica m5.

https://www.google.de/search?hl=de&...urce=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=SuULUe7zMdHNsgaB8oH4Dg

(I just love "odd ball" ultra HQ cameras) For me Leica and Contax is just
too boring....a 1971 Porsche Carrera S is a great car, but i would prefer a Lamborghini.
(Miura ) ,-)
Mercedes S Class W116 is a great car but i would buy
a Citroen SM.
Its fun using unkown cameras with excellent unkown
lenses.
There is a BRAUN / Nuremberg top of the line rangefinder camera around,
called braun Super Paxette 3.
Also an overlooked german true HQ alternative to a Leica.
http://www.foto-haag.de/cm/markt/anzeige.php?id=108

Nice lens Braun - Color - Ennalyt SLK 1:1,9 / 50 with bayonett mount!
Try it and you will like it! (45 bucks only!)
 
From what I've seen of Soviet camera quality...my LTM Jupiter 8, a Helios 44 and a pair of Zenit M42 SLRs....I'd probably have to spring for the Leica. The least rubbish of the bunch is he Helios 44 lens. The Jupiter gives beautiful results but feels cheap. The Zenit cameras are pretty heinous.
 
Well there are junk Zenits around, maladjusted and worn out,
but there are great ones too:

These Zenit 7 s are nice!

xngui0.jpg


http://www.sovietcams.com/index.php?1188557885

Zenit 7 is a super smooth small production 60s design and high Quality
SLR, silent operation and good lens.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/helios44/

(I cant say anything bad about the
Helios 44-1 that came with it- this Lens is a close Carl Zeiss Sonnar Copy
just as the Jupiter 8
...maybe youve got a bad one)

There also are MC Helios 44-6 or 44-7 that can give brilliant results:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/vinicius_ldna/7860778560/

I know several professional photographers using particulary this Helios
44-6 / -7 MC type of lens.

This shot shows the nice sharpness of a helios 44-6 MC :
http://www.flickr.com/photos/vinicius_ldna/7707518608/in/photostream/

But of course there can be bad ones on ebay (tourist or flew market junk...)
 
I have a Werra, I don't recommend it. The CZJ Tessar isn't a great lens. The functionality of the Werra is counter-intuitive. I only bought it as a collector's item, not a decent photographic instrument.

I would even say that MiniMoke is better off to get a used Bessa or a Leica CL, a cheap M-mount adapter ring, and perhaps a lowly Jupiter-8. Nothing wrong with that combo, at least to get one's feet wet. I've taken some very good photos with a Jupiter-8.

Alternatively, he could get a Canon 7 and use a Russian LTM lens. Cheap but very functional combo. I took this photo using a Canon 7 and an Industar 26/2.8:

6001216584_70794dd047_z.jpg


Also, +1 as Drtenma said above ... a used Contax G2 and 45mm Planar is a beautiful thing. Cheaper than a plain M3 body alone. The build quality and functionality of the G2 is superb. The 45mm Planar is easily the equal of a Summicron. It's just a different system. Depends on whether you want to go in that direction. This was taken with the G2 + 45mm Planar:

4966819439_598943de65.jpg
 
You should hold both in your hands and look through the finders before you decide (if possible). They both have their pros and cons.
I also highly recommend the Canon 50/1.8 and 35/2.0


Thomas
 
Hi,

A CL means almost all M lenses can be fitted but the VF is only for 40, 50 and 90mm and as the 40 and 50 appear together can confuse. But great if you stick to the 40 and 90mm lenses made for it. Beyond that you need extra VF's on top and the RF base is too short for 135mm lenses.

OTOH, a good FED 2 and Jupiter-8 can turn out excellent pictures. I used the J-8 on my M2 and still do.

Th trouble is people have had bad experiences with FED's etc and, for reasons that escape me, similar experiences with Leicas and Contaxes are seen differently. But ex-USSR cameras are much cheaper to repair and turn into a thing of beauty and a joy forever, etc, etc. (But there's lots of un-kissed frogs out there.)

Regards, David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom