Leica M3 vs Konica Hexar AF

Leica M3 vs Konica Hexar AF

  • Leica M3

    Votes: 45 61.6%

  • Konica Hexar AF

    Votes: 28 38.4%
  • Total voters
    73
  • Poll closed .
I had a Hexar prior, and a bunch of M's --I definitely prefer the M's. The main things that detracted from the Hexar (for me) were the slow top shutter speed, and the fact that I didn't like the rendering of the lens at F/2. I found that I was always trying to think of what the camera was doing for me, which values it was choosing for me. I like to make those decisions myself. It is a very well built and comfortably handling camera.
Hope that helps a tad.
Cheers,
Jim
 
Funnily enough, I've never really had the drawback of mis-focusing on the Hexar, after a while you get use to its foibles (a little bar top right gives you focus distance). But its metering really doesn't like backlit situations in my experience, it's also a very contrasty lens, so I do personally prefer the 'feel' of the photos I get with my CL (or got with my M3). Of course you can adjust for it later, but it still has a distinct signature.

Small sample, admittedly, but it's impressive that the Hexar has polled half the number of votes of the M3, considering how iconic the latter is.
 
That comment about the auto focus confirming that it has locked on in the cross hairs is interesting ... by it's nature it can't really show you exactly what it has locked on to I guess. When an SLR focuses you are seeing exacly what you will get image wise.

It's obviously not a major issue though.
 
I never used any of the two, but already considered both. To me the main question is - what is the intended use? A more dedicated approach that gives you more time to measure the exposure (or guess it), set the exposure, focus? Than go with a M film body. But for a travel where you want to be able to get a nice shot which may come up when you are not 100% ready or the conditions are quickly changing - the Hexar AF will have an advantage.

On my "quest" for a travel film camera I already tried Olympus XA, Fuji Silvi Zoom f2.8 (pretty much a P&S with 25 - 50 zoom lens) and recently Konica Auto S3. While I like the S3 (still a rather compact) I already was in a situation where I was not able to focus fast enough - and would have preferred to have the Hexar AF instead.

Up to large extend - when it comes to AF high end P&S cameras - I am torn between Hexar AF - fast AF, silent, great 35/2.0 lens, but LARGE - and the Contax T3 - good lens, small, but only 35/2.8 and expensive.

If the Hexar AF were smaller - it would be for me a clear choice. I guess I will have to give it a try someday :)
 
Out at lunch yeseterday with the new Hexar I missed two shots that I might well have got if I'd had my wits about me, shots which I would never have got with my Ms. So the automation is the great thing. My first roll showed very much the Japanese signature high contrast and I will find that a problem I suspect. I was using colour, Ektar, and maybe this will be less stark with black and white - I don't know. Finally, while I am loving the automation and cleverness of the Hexar, from the first few shots I was immediately confirming in my mind my preference for a fully manual camera for shots that are not time-critical. Last evening I went out with the M5 and 50 Summicron and was pleased to be back in familiar territory. So I didn't vote. While I laud Mike Johnston's one lens one camera notion, it was only for a year, and I think it is great to have different cameras and the merits of one contrasting with another make you love both more. I think this is different to men who put forward a similar argument in relation to girls, and closer to the pleasures of driving different cars on a regular basis.
 
It's funny... People say the Hexar is large, yet a Leica is compact. Well, the Hexar is large compared to a T3, and the Leica is compact compared to an SLR. But of course the Hexar is smaller and lighter than an M3.

I would say that if you have at least 1 or 2 seconds per shot to focus, don't bother with an autofocus camera. I rely on autofocus because I shoot my fiancé and friends, and 1 or 2 seconds means the difference between a good expression and a "when is he going to take the photo?" expression.
 
Moriturii said:
Well, Juan's thread on this Konica Hexar af threw my big plan into a loop. I thought I'd get a Leica M3 and settle with that camera for a long time to be honest but now using a Konica Hexar AF seems very appealing. Now be honest, if you had to have only a Leica M3 (the one I am eyeballing comes with a 5cm f2 close-range lens and has a serial of over 1.000.000) and I might be able to get it for about 700-800 bucks I think. It's in fine shape, nothing exceptional, normal used.

OR

Well, what seems to be a million times more practical and user-friendly, travel-friendly Konica Hexar af, with metering, great AF etc etc. The especially nice thing is that I can probably get this for half the price. Since I am a poor ******* that is a big plus!

If you had to pick the one or the other, which one would you recommend for me? :)

Thanks guys!
Click to expand...


Well, I can relate to not having a lot of cash, or any. Having been out of work for 30 months now and medical bills piling up, shelter and food come first. The rest comes later...or never.

However, no one that I personally know on this forum is in quite that sad shape, so if you have a budget for a camera system, go for what you want and keep it! If you want the M3, you will always want one until someday in 30 years you might find one and wish that you had bought it. People are just weird that way.;) If you are of this personality, buy the M3! I did two years ago when I could afford it and it has been a marvelous time. The M3 is special.

OTOH, some people are extremely frugal and that is most important. If you are like this, great! Buy the less expensive camera and lens and start shooting! Your images will thank you!:)

I hope this is just more confusing for you....;)

Note: I have never seen or held a Konica camera, so take that for what it is worth.
 
bensyverson said:
It's funny... People say the Hexar is large, yet a Leica is compact. Well, the Hexar is large compared to a T3, and the Leica is compact compared to an SLR. But of course the Hexar is smaller and lighter than an M3.

I would say that if you have at least 1 or 2 seconds per shot to focus, don't bother with an autofocus camera. I rely on autofocus because I shoot my fiancé and friends, and 1 or 2 seconds means the difference between a good expression and a "when is he going to take the photo?" expression.
Click to expand...

Yes, different situations are handled the best and most joyful ways with different cameras... That's why I prefer to carry more than one camera... Cameras are tools more than brands... Instead of a Leica M I use an R4M and an R3A because with them I can do a lot more than I can with any M: it's just as simple as that... Now I carry a Hexar AF too, because it's light, and because it can do things Ms can't and Bessas can't... It doesn't mean I'll stop using my Bessas or Nikons or XA or Hasselblad or Leica IIIF: it means now I am ready for getting images I couldn't get with other cameras no matter how well I used them or how fast I coud be with them... That's the very high value of the Hexar AF as a tool above great RFs. And to me Hexar AF is designed for very competent photographers, and not for amateurs: it implies you really know what you're doing and you need to have several variables in your mind and take decisions quickly... It can be used as a point-and-shoot, but to get the most out of it, you should be trained in photography and manual cameras before... Just my opinion...

Cheers,

Juan
 
Last edited:
if i could only select one and live within its range of opportunities, i;d take a M3 over the hexar af in any season.
 
If I had to pick one camera/lens for the rest of my life, it would be an AF SLR with a zoom.

And yes, then I'd wish I had never known the beauty of RFs and fast prime lenses...

Cheers,

Juan
 
The two options here exclude each other.
You want to shoot 50mm and beyond?, take the M3.
You feel content with one FOV, and it is the 35mm, the Hexar.
now if you want a range of FOVs and the tactile feel of leicas, you have lots of good options (M2, M4's, M5, M6 M7, MP)
 
I've had both and have used both extensively. The M3 is great for sitting by the fire with a glass of fine wine. Just feels so good. Add you can pretend you're a famous photo-journalist.

However, if you want to take really great photographs while walking around and not worry about fiddiling with a light meter, trying to rewind film with the goofy rewind crank and then trying to get new film loaded, buy the Konica. The lens is as good or better than the early Summicrons. Really quiet. Of course no one will mistake you for that famous photo-journalist.
 
Some people care more about tools than about brands... It depends on the assignment...

Cheers,

Juan
 

Attachments

  • 301705.jpg
    301705.jpg
    86.7 KB · Views: 0
Moriturii said:
..., they're all the same to me. 50mm or 35mm whatever,...
Click to expand...

Based on this comment and another you made suggesting the lower price may fit your budget better, I'd say that the Hexar is the better choice. Notice I'm not saying its the better camera since we're talking about two completely different animals.
 
A rather bizarre comparison/choice because they are so different from each other. The best choice depends completely on what and how the OP plans to photograph. They are very different tools, each very, very good at what they do best.

If AE and/or AF is important, the Hexar AF
If lens options, manual control, and dead reliable mechanical operation are important, the M2/3.
 
Last edited:
Fun to see this thread still going. I have decided, it shall be the M3. Because a good opportunity shouldn't be missed. :)

Tune in next week where I make a new thread and say that I bought a Contax G2 with 45mm f2 instead :p

Thanks all, great forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom