Leica IIIg

[Tadeyev]

Hello all,

I was wondering about something….
What is behind the fascination (and pricing !!) of he IIIg ?

I mean, I am sure it is a great camera and all, but it is so much bigger than the regular III's and II's, and doesn't (in my view anyway) offer so much more. It feels like a hybrid to me: screwmount history trying to become an M3….Indeed, being so much bigger than its predecessors, you would think that someone buying a IIIg would be better off with an M3.

Can anyone here who uses one tell us more about why they enjoy using it?
I just think I am missing something ;-)

 

[Elmar Lang]

Hello,

I'm new to the IIIg: in other words, I'm a RF Contax user, but since a long time I've had a IIIg in unusable condition, just put on a shelf of my library.

Then, I've decided that such a fine piece should do its job so, I took it to the Genoa based firm of SamCa (specialized in old and relaitively old Leicas) and asked for a complete overhaul.

Now, it perfectly works and I'm impatiently waiting to see the first roll of dias made in the past weeks.

It feels very fine while held in hand. It needed some time to accustom myself to focus with the lever at the base of the lens's barrel (actually, I often instinctively look for Contax's focusing wheel with my right middle finger...). The shutter is very quiet; no vibration and the sight is bright, with the two frames for the 50/90 lenses.

Definitely, a positive opinion about this camera.

Its price, higher than other screwmount Leicas?... Difficult to say... these pieces are sought after by both collectors and users and this can be one of the main reasons.

Best wishes,

E.L.

 

[Vickko]

Yeah, it was the evolutionary step to the M3.

The IIIg has brightline frames for the 50 and 90, and parallax compensation. The really sad part is that the RF focus spot wasn't incorporated into the viewing frame.

Collector value is higher on the IIIg, driving the prices.

I still think the best LTM Leica is an M3 with adapters.

🙂

 

[haempe]

Yeah, it was the evolutionary step to the M3.
...

Well, not really... more a step back out of fear to loose existing customers...

Leica M3 introduced 1954; Leica IIIg introduced 1957.

 

[shimokita]

the shutter speeds of the g are a bit more familiar and match the newer meters. Had my IIIf out today with a canon 28mm... no complaints on the afternoon activities.

Casey

 

[Tadeyev]

I know the analogy below doesn't really work….But maybe it was a little like now?
I mean, digital is there, and yet film cameras continue to be made and many photographers just don't want to bother changing?

If all your experience was with Barnacks, the the M3 might have been a mighty strange beast...

 

[haempe]

...
If all your experience was with Barnacks, the the M3 might have been a mighty strange beast...

Maybe. But I think (personally) the main aspect was a alternative to the M3, which brings some advanced features and keep the diverse (and pricey) SM accessories usable.

 

[traveler_101]

can

Maybe. But I think (personally) the main aspect was a alternative to the M3, which brings some advanced features and keep the diverse (and pricey) SM accessories usable.

At the time the IIIg must have been less expensive than the M3 . . . perhaps. That would have been an advantage. The reverse is true today, of course. I do think that for users--not collectors--the earlier IIIs (I have a IIIf) make sense because of size and low cost, while if you decide you want more speed and precision in photographing especailly with longer lenses you should get a M3. But Elmar Lang sounds as if he has done well by his IIIg and I am sure it is a very nice camera to use.