From FED-2 to Leica M2

[Kumpunen]

Is this G.A.S. or is it normal?

I'm considering to take the leap to Leica world, and my FSU rangefinder FED-2 has taken me to this point. It is a marvel. I'm sure I will never part with it. Having glasses (-5) is an issue. Diopter adjustment in FED is just perfect: I can frame precise shots without my spectacles, or I can wear glasses and take a quick shot with a limited view (You really need to push your eye into the FED's viewfinder to frame well). Still I feel FED-2 is the best there is among the FSU rangefinders: size, quality, finder quality, style — No Zorkis nor Kievs nor even later FEDs can match that.

My FED-2 also taught me how to let go of the light meter. It's a lot more fun this way – like driving without a map — or better even like driving without a TomTom navigator! And since 35-50mm has always been The Focal Length for me, I find myself searching for an M2 and some glass to go with it.

So I can't help wanting to move on. I have an ever-increasing Leica envy, and I've had it bad for years. I'm sure I'll have no trouble finding money for a good M2. I've seen bodies being sold in eBay for 400EUR.

Do you think an M2 will deepen my relation to photography, or will it be just a phase before a bigger and better Leica? Have you found one and felt it was the last camera you ever needed?

 

[brainwood]

Kumpunen

Yes it's is Gas but I took a similar route from a Fed 2 to a Leica III and thoughly enjoyed the experience . I have since added an M2 and for the past 3-4 years I have found the two cameras to be good fit . I have no plans to change cameras again, the M2 fits my way of working and after a service is not likely to give any problems for many years - hopefully . So in those terms it's the last camera I'll ever need.

I think the bottom line will be if it works for you and there's probably only one way to find out . Atleast with Leica prices being fairly static you will be able to get your money if you find it's not for you

Chris

 

[shortstop]

I have an MP, but think that an M2 is the same thing without meter and you say don't need it. Go and buy it!

 

[gb hill]

I'm quite satisified with my Bessa R but if I was to ever make the jump to a Leica an M2 would be high on the list. I say go for it & enjoy the ride.

 

[Kumpunen]

Many thanks for those comments.

I do want to reach a state of happily focusing on Photograpy instead of endlessly hoarding cameras.

Chris, it sounds to me you are content with your M2 and it brings me confidence to explore this path. Like you said, there's only one way to find out.

 

[pete hogan]

Most everyone who tries an M2 likes it. I had a nice user for many years, so I didn't need to be especially careful with it. Eventually, I gave it to our daughter, we would never get rid of it.

Be prepared to have it serviced at some point, mine went to DAG for lube and new covering about 10 years ago. Certainly one of the best film cameras ever.

 

[lrochfort]

I just bought an M2 to upgrade from my Fed 2. The viewfinder and rangefinder makes a huge difference. It's bright and clear and using the rf is orders if magnitude easier than the fed.

I use my Jupiter 12 on the M2 and it works fantastically. Perhaps get a really nice M2 and a J12 until you can afford more. Te J12 really is outstanding.

 

[ray*j*gun]

Don't buy an M2 unless you want the finest RF camera ever made IMO. Also assuming you were to find a nice example it would make most (Contax IIIa's and IIa's excluded) feel like Holga's. BTW I own 2 FSU's and vitually every RF made at one time or another...I'm one of those "endless camera hoarders" you mentioned above.

 

[lukitas]

I made the same jump : fed2 to M2.
The M2 was a revelation. The viewfinder made me fall in love.

But then I wanted to have the M3, also for it's viewfinder. And I got one.
My ultimate kit : M3 with a 50, M2 with a 28, a light meter and a couple of yellow filters (for the clouds, and occasionally as an ad hoc ND filter).

I still do have attacks of GAS. Sometimes I dream about a Hasselblad. Recently I nearly got seduced into a big loan by the Monochrom. I don't think GAS will ever stop rearing its ugly head. And once you're in Leica territory, GAS is an expensive illness.

I confess to feeling, that using the leica's has 'deepened my relationship with photography', but actually, that is a load of twaddle. Yes, the M's are a lot more fun to use, and they are mechanically and optically 'better', but what matters is what you decide to expose to film, not what you do it with. 'Deepening ones relationship with photography' is about learning to see, choosing the equipment for recording that is a secondary consideration. If the only thing that counts is taking photographs, a fed2 will do quite nicely. Of course, the M2 is much more comfortable in use than the Fed. Quite a step up. Years of dreaming about impossibly expensive lenses ahead.

Cheers

 

[mcfingon]

Make the move to a Hasselblad, Lukitas for more accurate mirror shots. You'll be so glad you did.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Yes, the only FSU I decided to keep is my family FED-2.
Not only for family feelings, but for same as OP feels.
FED-2 is simple, very elegant camera with long base RF and fast, smooth rewind by index finger.
Reason why I added M4-2 is because I like to use 35mm lens and have frames for it in one place, don't like additional viewfinders at all. Plus parallax correction.
But style of both is identical, no exposure meter and all is metal.
I use M4-2 and Fed-2 in 90/10 proportion.
Leica is more versatile, but FED-2 is divine.

 

[farlymac]

If I ever get one of my Fed-2's working right, I might grow to like them. Bought for all the same reasons as stated before, especially the viewfinder correction. Love the I-26M and I-22 I have for them, even on the Zarya.

I don't lust for an M body, as I've got a couple of LTM cams that will be quite nice once they are repaired/CLA'd. And switching to an M would mean a whole new lens mount to support (But then, once you get two or three lenses for an M, what else do you need?)

But the idea of having a high quality system camera is always at the back of my mind. Maybe an M4, or M6. Still, if someone waved an M2/3 in my face at an affordable price, I'd be surely tempted.

Go for it!

PF

 

[zuiko85]

Your correction is -5 ?!! Really? Both eyes?
That is strongly nearsighted. Like "blind without your glasses" nearsighted.

I asked because the M2 has no diopter correction built in. You would have to budget for a screw in diopter with a total correction close to your glasses prescription. Looking at the B&H website I only see minus diopters going to -3 so you may have to have a custom diopter ground. I don't know who would do that work.

If, on the other hand you meant -.5 then probably no problem.

 

[Kumpunen]

Thank you all for those comments! And zuiko85, I truly am -5 near sighted. Bad-eye-power to the max. Luckily FED-2 has a very large diopter correction — the only one so far I can use without glasses. All my other cameras (about 20 of them) I shoot with glasses on.

With FED however you really need to stick your eye right into the viewfinder. Not so much with my Olympus, Polaroid and other cameras—they're quite ok to shoot with glasses on. Range/viewfinders are just easier to use with other cameras, I suppose.

Another difficult camera for spectacles is my Moskva-5. It is quite hard to frame well with that puny viewfinder. No diopter adjustments either. I'd really need to take my glasses off to frame, but then I can't really see what I'm looking at. Not handy, not quick either.

Not actually having tried a Leica M2, I now realize I must go and try for myself if the viewfinder works for me—with glasses.

 

[Kumpunen]

... If the only thing that counts is taking photographs, a fed2 will do quite nicely. Of course, the M2 is much more comfortable in use than the Fed. Quite a step up. Years of dreaming about impossibly expensive lenses ahead.

Well said Lukitas, thank you for the reality check!

 

[Kumpunen]

There isn't many M2s for sale around Helsinki area, but there is an M4 that I could examine. Isn't the viewfinder very similar to M2? The M4's seem to go for somewhat a higher price though.

 

[zuiko85]

The eye relief should be the same so you could get a good idea of what you could see with glasses. I'm also nearsighted but only about -1.2 and I can see the 50mm frames in my M4-2 with glasses but the 35mm frame is hopeless with glasses. I think until Leica started to offer different finder magnification on the MP all the M finders from M2 to M6 were .72 magnification.

As for "Years of dreaming about impossibly expensive lenses ahead" That kept me from having a Leica M for years. However I was able to get a good deal on two used CV lenses and only then I did look for a body. But it was a hard two months having those lenses just sitting on the shelf and no way to use them. My only Leica lens is a 90mm f4 Elmar in LTM that was reasonable at $150 in very good condition.

 

[Dez]

There isn't many M2s for sale around Helsinki area, but there is an M4 that I could examine. Isn't the viewfinder very similar to M2? The M4's seem to go for somewhat a higher price though.

The M4 finder is the same as the M2, with the addition of frame lines for the 135mm lens. Apart from that difference, the M4 has rapid film loading, an automatic frame counter, and a rewind crank instead of a knob. The M4 and M5 were probably the last Leicas built to the original very high build quality. M4's were made in much smaller quantity than M2 and M3 models, with a resulting higher price. The only down side to the M4 was the addition of plastic bits in various control levers. If it bothers you, it is always possible to change back to the solid metal ones used in the M2 and M3, resulting in the best camera Leica never made.



Later models are still very good and have some excellent features, but in my opinion never again reached that same level of mechanical quality.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[xxloverxx]

The M4 finder is the same as the M2, with the addition of frame lines for the 135mm lens. Apart from that difference, the M4 has rapid film loading, an automatic frame counter, and a rewind crank instead of a knob.

I find the paired framelines a little more cluttered than the "pure" single framelines of the M2 and M3, but there is no doubt that the loading is MUCH faster (3x+ faster on my M6 vs on my M2), as is rewinding. Compromise…

 

[nobbylon]

I say just do it but get a nice rangefinder patch. Exterior condition is immaterial but nice shutter curtains and a good rangefinder are a must. I've had loads of M2's and my fair share of 3's, 4's and 6's plus 3 MP's And I've always found the M2 the nicest to live with long term. Clear uncluttered viewfinder and a stronger r/f than the M3.
In reality any M is a great long term camera and paired with your lens of choice will give years of service. Go on, treat yourself,
Regards John