Leica M3 - Returning to Where I Started

[Miles.]

Many moons ago I purchased a Leica M3 as my first M. It was a later DS and I vividly remember lifting the camera to my eye and exclaiming when I saw the clarity and contrast of the rangefinder patch. I was hooked.

I sold off that M3 a year later after growing tired of the removable take-up spool, the double stroke action, and the "slower"rewind knob, and moved onto more modern M's.

However, I've grown "wiser" in the intervening years and have grown to appreciate the design and quirks of the early M3. Moreover, I now believe that Leica never made a better camera for the 50mm shooting experience - they got it right the first time.

Anyway, here I am, showing off my "new" first batch M3 that just got back from Don's workbench. It's perfect. Mounted is a very nice collapsible Sonnar.

Who else has found themselves back right where they started?

Happy snaps, everyone!

 

[Erik van Straten]

gelatin silver print (summilux 50mm f1.4 v2) leica m3

Famous Dutch writer W.F. Hermans at home in Paris, 1986

Explore on Flickr today.

Erik.

 

[Michael Markey]

First Leica I ever bought.
A `55 DS matched with a 40 Nocton single coated lens .
Still have it .

Michael Markey

 

[Bingley]

Many moons ago I purchased a Leica M3 as my first M. It was a later DS and I vividly remember lifting the camera to my eye and exclaiming when I saw the clarity and contrast of the rangefinder patch. I was hooked.

I sold off that M3 a year later after growing tired of the removable take-up spool, the double stroke action, and the "slower"rewind knob, and moved onto more modern M's.

However, I've grown "wiser" in the intervening years and have grown to appreciate the design and quirks of the early M3. Moreover, I now believe that Leica never made a better camera for the 50mm shooting experience - they got it right the first time.

Anyway, here I am, showing off my "new" first batch M3 that just got back from Don's workbench. It's perfect. Mounted is a very nice collapsible Sonnar.

Who else has found themselves back right where they started?

Happy snaps, everyone!

View attachment 4829984

Congrats, Miles!

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I kept the first Leica I bought- the M3DS, made the same month I was. Bought some 25+ years ago.
I picked up some extra spools, back when they were $10 and $15 each. I'd pre-thread the leader onto them, and use like a cartridge for fast reloads.

 

[Rob-F]

Congratulations, on your new companion! She looks gorgeous and well preserved! For me, it is the M2 with 35, 50, and 90mm lenses! I bought it in about 1960 when I lived in Las Vegas, and by some good fortune I have always hung onto it. That's her, on the left, in my avatar, in a Luigi case.

 

[kshapero]

I let go my original M3 (which I bought in 1974) about 3 years ago because I bought my first brand new camera ever, an M-A Black Chrome! is it better or is it worse? Who cares, I've been having a ball all theses years shooting Leica.

 

[Bingley]

My M3 was a relatively recent acquisition (well, several years ago). It’s a single-stroke, user-looking camera that I bought in Classifieds; DAG did an overhaul after I got it. Gotta say, I understand what the fuss has been about. It’s a lovely, smooth camera in use. It’s not only perfect for 50mm, it’s also a great camera for shooting 40mm lenses, using the entire vf to frame.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Very nice camera even just to keep...
My first, M4-2 is not in use, but I don't want to sell it.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Very good idea, Bingley! I'll try this ASAP.

gelatin silver print (summicron rigid 50mm f2) leica m3

Amsterdam, 1979

Erik.

 

[mfunnell]

My M3 (a 1957 DS model) is probably my favourite film camera. It is certainly the camera I used with film most recently.

I really need to shoot more film. I was supposed to do that in what is officially my retirement - but retirement doesn't seem to have fully taken just yet (I'm still working in what's supposed to be part-time/casual role - which seems to be forever expanding its time demands).

But still: congratulations on your camera, and 🤞 you like yours as much as I like mine 😃

...Mike

 

[santino]

IMO it’s the best camera to shoot a 50, whether DS or SS. The magnification is just amazing! Have fun with your M3.

 

[Erik van Straten]

gelatin silver print (summicron rigid 50mm f2) leica m3

Belarus, 2005

Erik.

 

[Evergreen States]

I inherited an M3 DS when a close friend of the family passed in early November. He had bought it at the PX when he was stationed in West Germany in the US Army back in the late 1950s. I need to get it and the rigid Summicron and 1.5 Summarit he had with it CLAed. I've taken it out a few times even though the rangefinder is slightly out of alignment. Loading film is needlessly complicated and I'd much prefer a rear swing door like every other 135 camera but I was able to load my second roll in less than a minute sitting on a bus bench, having to hurry as the bus I was waiting for suddenly rounded the corner and pulled into the station. I agree it's a very nice camera and I look forward to getting more intimate with it.

 

[Mackinaw]

My ex organized and ran estate sales many years back and picked up a fairly early production DS M3 which ended up in my hands. Hard to beat the M3 viewfinder if you're a 50mm user. Plus the advance is so smooth. The camera is currently in Japan awaiting a complete teardown by the experts at Kanto Camera. I won't see the camera until March, but it'll come back ready for another 70 years of use.

Jim B.

 

[Archiver]

I've never used a M3, but have been tempted regularly when the Summicron 50 was my favourite lens. I might still get one at some stage if the price is right.

As for going back to where you started, I learned the basics of photography with Dad's Pentax ME in the mid 80s. After getting into digital photography in 2002, I started shooting with the ME again in 2006. Now I use the lenses with my Panasonic S5, so in a sense, I've returned to where I started.

 

[Rich1950]

I worked backwards from a MP to a M3. What I found is the .91 finder is a help composing. 1. Its natural. I look and my angle of vision is within the 50 frame line. 2. The magnification is welcome and I focus with glasses off. 3. The edge of the .91 frame to the edge of the M3 viewfinder creates a semi SLR viewfinder experience. 4. I can use the entire finder to frame a 40/2., a superior walking around FL.

My M3 finder is similar in finder crispness to my Minolta SRT 101 with circular shatter prism. This is not a modern ideal but outside in good light not an issue. My M5 finder is crisper to focus. Telling truth here…..a Minolta X-570 finder will be much crisper and easier to focus. However the user experience will be sub par with the clunky action of the Minolta shutter. There are multiple aspects to why we shoot a Leica.

 

[Harry the K]

I agree- the M3 finder is the best for 50mm.
But: a .72- finder with magnification loupe 1,25X is about the same.

 

[chuckroast]

I normally shoot MF or LF, but when I shoot 35mm it's been Nikon, though I've probably used ever major Japanese SLR at one point or another.

I've had a Barnack Leica for ages, but a while back, I gave in to my long held desire to own M equipment. I ended up with an M2 and an M5 (both with DAG CLAs) and several lenses, the 50mm 'Cron among them. After 10-ish rolls of film between the two bodies, I've come away with several impressions:

• The Leica mystique is so for a reason. There is a kind of mechanical and optical flawlessness to their design you have to experience for yourself. They are elegant and intuitive to use in ways no other camera I've ever handled has been.
  
  
• The are absolutely not worth the money, particularly the new stuff. If you're careful, you can get older bodies and lenses at "reasonable" prices, but even so, that's at least 2-4X what vintage Nikon or Canon equipment costs. I have a Nikon 35mm f/1.4 that performs comparably to my Summicron 35mm f/2 ASPH, but the latter cost me multiples of the former. Yes, I got the box, case, shade, etc. with it, which does make it more expensive. But still, paying 4X for approximately the same performance isn't "worth it".
  
  
• It's not just about money. I do not know why and cannot quite explain it, but I just "see" differently with a Leica rangefinder than any of my Nikon SLR bodies. Not better, not worse, just differently. This is a work in progress. I have not yet owned Leica M long enough for it to be seamless in use for me, the way my Nikons are.
  
  
• It's still just 35mm. You can't beat the dealer here. Negative size matters, and for some subjects with lots of small detail, it matters a lot. Even on a tripod with a cable release, the Leica negatives do not come anywhere close to even an average 645 negative, let alone Hasselblad or 4x5.

I will soon return to the land of larger negatives. I won't get rid of the Leicas though. I think of my many cameras as paintbrushes - each plays a different role in my work. The Leicas and Nikons will continue to see use where- and as it makes sense.

 

[Richard G]

M2 is one better. I don’t mind the spool and the rewind. I have never ever had a misload with the M2 spool take up system. There are two current Leica models with the same rewind. I was out at the weekend with essentially two of Leica’s current M cameras: the M2 (=MA) and the M6 (=M6). Porsche 911 continuity doesn’t come close to that.