Leica IIf vs IIIc

[davidnewtonguitars]

I'm still in the hunt for a IIIc, but am considering a IIf with 1/1000.
I don't think I will need the slow speeds of the III, but do want the fast.
The slow speed clockwork seems to be maintenance prone, a II will not have it.
Greybeards please school me.

 

[Dralowid]

IIf with 1/1000 should be a reasonably priced camera that will please. Very good idea and newer than IIIc which always helps (if only a bit).

IIf with 1/500 is not that common but does not carry a premium.

Both should be fine.

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

Most of the IIf's I've encountered have 1/500, seems the 1k is rare.
Thanks Dralowid.

 

[lxmike]

good luck in your quest

 

[Robert Lai]

I had a IIF red dial with 1/1000 speed and flash synch.
I DID miss having the slower shutter speeds, like 1/10, 1/5, etc.
Thus, I went to the IIIF, then a IIIG.

 

[scigeek]

My 111c slow speeds work perfectly well, and I use them a fair bit now (church interiors and the like).
The 111c will take a perfectly sharp picture at 1/20th handheld if you're a steady shooter. Cheaper than a fast lens!

It comes down to getting your camera from a reputable source who, if he/she has not given it a CLA, has at least checked to see that everything is working as it should. The 111c is pretty tough.

 

[bucs]

the IIf with 1000 top speed goes for slightly higher than the IIf with 500 top speed.

If you choose the IIf, get an f/2 screwmount lens to offset the lack of slow speeds