Bill Clark
Veteran
You're much better and quicker loading the Barnack than me! Ha.
IIIg or M4-2
- Thread starter lxmike
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 56
- Views 840
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
If it's in even reasonably good condition, I wouldn't worry. The mechanisms are simpler, the gearing sturdier. I like my M4, but the M4-2 I had for years, was a champ.
lxmike
M2 fan.
😀😀😀😀😀😀 it would make a great you tube channel loads of us trying to speed load a IIIf😀
lxmike
M2 fan.
lxmike
M2 fan.
Thanks Helen, is there much difference between the m4-2 and the m4-p....l suppose thats a question for another thread
ray*j*gun
Veteran
I'll buck the trend I suppose and opine that a Barnack is a must have Leica. Yes they are less convenient but my goodness what a feel to them and one gets used to the separate VF Rf in no time. Besides it forces you to slow down and examine each shot. I do have an M2 which I love but I would not part with my Barnacks before the M. Oh and LTM lenses are cheaper and plentiful plus they can be used on M's but not the reverse.
Bingley
Veteran
I've owned an M4-2 (Robert Lai now has it) and I regularly use a Summitar on a IIIc. First, I think it's a myth that the M4-2 build quality is inferior in any meaningful sense to prior M Leicas. There are reports that some early run M4-2s had viewfinder flare problems, but the M4-2 I had never did. I think it's a great user M body and would nicely complement your Canon P.
That said, in the choice you have at hand, I'd be inclined to go for the IIIg + Summitar, for a number of reasons: (1) I happen to like shooting Barnack-style cameras (the construction and small size appeal to me); (2) as noted above, if you don't like the IIIg, you can sell it and keep the Summitar; (3) I disagree with the comment above that the Summitar is too large for a Barnack body; and (4) a Summitar in good condition can be a really good optic. BTW, is the Summitar coated or uncoated? (The pre-WWII versions are uncoated and use the old f-stops; the versions from the late 40s/early 50s were coated and use modern f-stops.
But that leads to a final point: condition. What do you know about the condition of the Summitar/IIIg and M4-2? Has either camera been CLA'd? Can you inspect? Model preferences aside, you might be better off choosing the sample that's in the best condition.
That said, in the choice you have at hand, I'd be inclined to go for the IIIg + Summitar, for a number of reasons: (1) I happen to like shooting Barnack-style cameras (the construction and small size appeal to me); (2) as noted above, if you don't like the IIIg, you can sell it and keep the Summitar; (3) I disagree with the comment above that the Summitar is too large for a Barnack body; and (4) a Summitar in good condition can be a really good optic. BTW, is the Summitar coated or uncoated? (The pre-WWII versions are uncoated and use the old f-stops; the versions from the late 40s/early 50s were coated and use modern f-stops.
But that leads to a final point: condition. What do you know about the condition of the Summitar/IIIg and M4-2? Has either camera been CLA'd? Can you inspect? Model preferences aside, you might be better off choosing the sample that's in the best condition.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
I got rid of a IIIg to get an M4-2, and I have not regret it since.
lxmike
M2 fan.
lxmike
M2 fan.
the IIIg is a cosmetic user but has been over hauled by a friend who owns a camera clinic/repair shop🙂 he did not mentioned if the Summitar was coated or not, l am going to check it out at the weekend, will keep you informed
lxmike
M2 fan.
what lens do you use with it
The 50/3.5 Elmar is a lot smaller, but then again, it's a lot slower.
Summitar is my favorite older Leica lens, like it better than the collapsible Summicron and much better than the Summarit...
As stated above, there are multiple types: coated, uncoated, hex blades, ten blades. I have two pristine Summitars, one uncoated from 1940 and one coated from 1951 (hex blades.) The photo below is from the coated lens.
Summitar is my favorite older Leica lens, like it better than the collapsible Summicron and much better than the Summarit...
As stated above, there are multiple types: coated, uncoated, hex blades, ten blades. I have two pristine Summitars, one uncoated from 1940 and one coated from 1951 (hex blades.) The photo below is from the coated lens.
lxmike
M2 fan.
lovely image by the way😎The 50/3.5 Elmar is a lot smaller, but then again, it's a lot slower.
Summitar is my favorite older Leica lens, like it better than the collapsible Summicron and much better than the Summarit...
mdarnton
Well-known
Ever since I knew it existed I've wanted a IIIg, but over the same time period I've had two M3s, an M2, M4-2, and two M4s, and no IIIg, so you know that when push comes to shove, I'd get the M4-2.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I don't think it really matters; if you are considering both you'll probably get both and a lot of others before you know what hit you. It's a long and slippery slope, so beware. And then there's all the lenses to get and so on.
BTW, I think and I hope a lot of others do that the Summitar, especially the later coated ones, are nearly Summicrons in many ways and one of the best 'vintage' lenses made, ever.
Why not toss a coin and see what you reaction is when you check how it fell?
Regards, David
I don't think it really matters; if you are considering both you'll probably get both and a lot of others before you know what hit you. It's a long and slippery slope, so beware. And then there's all the lenses to get and so on.
BTW, I think and I hope a lot of others do that the Summitar, especially the later coated ones, are nearly Summicrons in many ways and one of the best 'vintage' lenses made, ever.
Why not toss a coin and see what you reaction is when you check how it fell?
Regards, David
Bingley
Veteran
Agree w/ David Hughes about the Summitar. I see that the OP has visited the "Summitar the Star" thread, so he's seen what this lens can do.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
I use a 3rd edition 35mm Summicron.
ferider
Veteran
Oh my, great photo (Summitar or else).
To the OP, I have IIIg and M4P. If I need to come back with keepers, I will pick the M4P. The IIIg is a cool object, in a "steam-punk" kind of way, and very fun to use, but you (1) are limited to LTM lenses (slow to change), has (2) no coincidental Frame/focus mechanism (makes faster lenses more difficult to focus, and (3) is much slower to load.
Plus, in contrast to - say - the IIIc, the IIIg is not really smaller than the M4P.
This is IIIg and 50/2.8 Elmar:
This is an M4P photo (with 50 Summilux), which I could not have taken with a IIIg. Happened too fast.
The real question is what you want to shoot with the camera. Only you will know.
Roland.
Similar threads
