Leica IIIg + collapable 50mm f/2 - Practical for Daily Shooting?

[Souljer]

Hi,

Just casting out for some experience and feedback from those of you who have and still do use this camera combo.

I currently have and have been shooting a M6 and two lenses for years. Usually when out and about I like to carry my M6 with the 35mm since it's the smallest and lightest combo I have.
However lately I've been thinking of getting a IIIg and a collapsible 50mm. I like the idea of a smaller daily carry rig and the bigger (as far as I can tell) viewfinder of the IIIg (compared to the other thread-mount Leicas - if that's correct).

I've read several threads here that mention other cameras like the IIIf which are similar and cheaper.
I'm open to hearing other suggestions based on my typical usage.

Most of my shooting is in daylight, low light (or at night) or indoors where a faster lens and a bright viewfinder is helpful.
I actually got started on Leica way back when I could not see anything in the SLR viewfinder except the neon sign on the back wall, when trying to shoot a band in a club.

I'm not trying to replace my M6 for this kind of work, just thinking about getting a IIIg for carrying around and shooting what I find in the streets or indoors, when I'm not officially taking pix.

From those that are experienced:
• I'd like to know if you think this old camera and lens would be a practical choice?
Do you think they are as durable as an M6? Mine's been dropped onto concrete, kicked, banged, etc. The worst that's happened is the hood got partially crushed in front of the lens. The camera was fine as far as I could tell. I'm not suggesting that the IIIg will go through all that, but I'm not much of a babysitter and it will have to be somewhat durable.

• What would a current (2013) reasonable user price be for this camera and lens?

• Are there any major differences between the thread-mount Summicrons and the M-mount? Or are they really the same except for the mounting?
I like that I can use an adapter and get the 50mm on my M6 when needed.

• Any thing else I should watch for or ask about when I find one?

Any advise or experience is appreciated.

If you're so inclined, please feel free to:
Post photos of this set-up if you have it to help me visualize what it will look like when I get one.
Post photos if it helps illustrate your point(s).
Post photos taken with this set-up anyway, just for fun.

Thanks.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Totally practical. The only reason I got rid of mine was that it was like new, boxed, all receipts, etc., and I thought I might as well see a (handsome) profit on it before it got scratched up.

But equally, I never bothered to replace it, because an M2 with a collapsible 50 isn't much bigger and is (in my view) a significantly better camera.

Cheers,

R.

 

[ray*j*gun]

Roger,

Is the Rf/VF bright enough for the kind of work the OP is interested in?

And the Barnacks are if anything more rugged than any M6.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Roger,

Is the Rf/VF bright enough for the kind of work the OP is interested in?

And the Barnacks are if anything more rugged than any M6.

Para 1: I remember it as being so, but it is 30+ years now. Then again, although the finder on a IIIa is small and squinty, it's bright enough for me, so viewfinder brightness doesn't worry me.

Para 2: Possibly the IIIc and after (cast chassis) are more rugged than Ms, but I'd not be so sure about the screw-mount cameras with the fabricated shutter crates (up to IIIb).

Cheers,

R.

 

[ray*j*gun]

^^^^ Good counterpoints.

BTW I am a huge Barnack fan and have too many of them. I use mine quit a bit but I must say that my M2 VF is much brighter and easier to use in dim lighting.

 

[philipus]

I recently dropped my 1931 II(D) onto the pavement which caused a piece of vulcanite to fall off but the camera didn't even dent. I'm not sure my TTL would have liked that very much. I haven't shot a IIIg but I sometimes use my Barnack with f2 or f1.4 lenses in dark surroundings and it works well. I would have thought a more modern IIIg would perform equally well.

 

[sparrow6224]

Practical? This is unmetered manual control mechanical camera with film we're talking about. Practical it ain/t. Satisfying and fun it can be.

The only negative to your list of questions is the VF/RF experience which is totally different on a Barnack camera than on an M-series camera. As you likely know the VF and RF are separate. The viewfinder will be adequate or fine or great -- plus you can get a better one to mount on the top. But depending on the unit the RF will range from "Oh, I get it, that's okay," to "I can't see a f****g thing." Luckily there is a diopter control which will help a lot. (Lever-ish thing attached to the film rewind unit, can be slid back and forth.)

Me, I enjoy them. My IIIf's have felt virtually indestructable to me, and my M6 I have proved isn't (a light drop led to major repairs). No one can tell you whether you'll like it. You're going to have to try one out.

The IIIg goes for a lot more than the IIIf. A IIIf red dial goes for $200-$250 and IIIg's go for $700 and up. You can research why the IIIg is supposed to be better -- I can't remember and have never felt inclined to pay enough to find out.

 

[leicapixie]

The 111G has a wonderful finder. Frames for 90mm. Loading a real pain.
Rather than add another camera(sez he who has way too many) rather add a faster lens if you don't have one. f2 or a f1.4 more than sufficient.
The M6 has metering: a big bonus.My Collapsible Summicron was a wonder in 1954..It is a soft, low contrast prone to flare.. If i had a load of spare cash, it would have a modern lens so fast, my head would spin.
Some SLR have very bright finders unlike the new do-it-all-nothing-well consumer DSLR. Most finders there suck.I used my Nikons/Canon SLR, in very low light with ease.
Re-think your M6.A superb machine. The flare viewfinder easily corrected with a piece of tape, when reqd.Easy loading, reasonably quite and fits the hand like a glove.

 

[jsrockit]

Practical compared to what? To the M6? Not really. However, it all comes down to what you want to deal with.

 

[furcafe]

What Mr. Hicks wrote. An M2 or M4 body, w/collapsible lens if necessary, would be a more practical solution & more compatible w/your existing M6 (no need for lens adapters).

I've shot a IIIg, IIIc, & various LTM copies (Reid, Leotax, Nicca, etc.) in low light conditions & while usable, they're far from ideal. Like you, I started off w/RFs in order to shoot in available darkness & using a Barnack is, IMHO, going backwards functionally. You get a small, light package, but w/none of the framing advantages of an M body or SLR & not optimal for low light shooting. The IIIg has a better VF than previous models (at the cost of a slightly bigger body), but you're still stuck w/the separate rangefinder, which isn't any better, & other LTM quirks (trickier loading & need for film trimming, separate shutter speed dials, etc.).

 

[Monochrom]

Hi, i used a iif and a iiig a lot...many years using only those cameras...i used an elmar 50mm f3.5....and it was really practical.
For B/W it´s a terrific combo...very small.
The cron would give you more in terms of speed but is not so flat as the elmar lens.

The collapsible summicrons are the older ones, is said the best comes out from f4 on. But it´s a coated lens and so it will be flare resistant and have more contrast.
I´m planning to purchase one of these crons for using on my m9, i love collapsible lenses.

🙂

 

[Roger Hicks]

Practical compared to what? To the M6? Not really. However, it all comes down to what you want to deal with.

I took 'practical' to mean 'usable, or at least, not likely to be thrown across the room as unusable'.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Vickko]

Depends on your shooting. What killed me was trying to shoot my son with the IIIg. The dual viewfinder and trying to focus and frame just frustrated the daylights out of me. The knob advance was bad, but, not as bad as trying to view and focus.

 

[thegman]

I have a IIIf, but looking to sell it. I'm selling because I prefer medium format, not due to practicality. I think the LTM Leicas are plenty practical, the only real downsides are film loading, and film wind on. If you like to shoot fast, the wind on will likely slow you down too much. Otherwise, it's not all that different to an M. I do prefer the M models in generally, but the IIIf and IIIg are very small by comparison.

 

[Stuart John]

Never used a IIIg but I have no problems using me IIIa shooting my kids playing in the park.
Few from the IIIa

 

[zauhar]

A Barnack with collapsible lens is easy to carry, and from that perspective very practical. I have come to rely on my IIIf most of the time, and I can generally focus in low light without too much trouble. Moreover, the IIIg has a much better VF (from what I read).

Randy

 

[jsrockit]

A Barnack with collapsible lens is easy to carry, and from that perspective very practical.

That's true.

 

[Bingley]

What Randy said. The OP wants a light, compact carry-around camera to supplement, not replace, his M6. I assume he'll continue to use the M6 for low light, available darkness photography, so the Barnack and collapsible 50 would probably be used for daylight shooting. With that understanding, a IIIg and collapsible 'chron is quite practical. A IIIf or IIIc or Canon IVSB2 would also fulfill the OP's requirements, and would likely be cheaper than a IIIg. The Canon has a single vf with adjustable magnification; put a little CV Skopar 50/2.5 on it, and it's a fine pocketable daily carry and quite rugged.

 

[jcb4718]

I have a Leica IIIg which I use with a Canon 50mm f1.5 sonnar type lens. I recently compared it (in a fanciful way!) with a Vito B in the photo.net, Classic Manual Camera section (4 April 2013). I also have a 50mm f2.8 collapsible Elmar. It's true that the IIIg has its idiosyncracies, all cameras do, but I found I could adapt to them and then the IIIg was joy to use. Thr rangefinder is 1.5x mag which aids focussing and the viewfinder is 0.7x mag with parallax corrected framelines (the earlier Barnaks are all 0.5x mag with no framelines). The only show-stopper is if you wear glasses, for you will certainly have to retrofit some kind of dioptric correction lens, as I described in my article. You really need to be able to get your eye close to the viewing port. I tried a seaparate 50mm viewfinder but it didn't work for me. That said about the viewfinder, with almost any lens it can certainly be a practical camera for everday shooting.

 

[ottluuk]

It seems that a case could be made for the Leica CL, no? It's small, has a meter, combined VF/RF, frame lines, M mount, normal-ish loading, probably cheaper than a nice IIIg.