Love my M2 !!!

It depends on the lens too. The cam cut's out at different points with different lenses. As long as infinity is "on" and 1m/3m/5m is correct - it is the lens rather than the camera.I cant remember now if the early M2's did cut out before 0.7 - but I cant see any reason why it should?
 
Just thought I must add my two cents worth or rather 2p.
Brought a 'rapidwinder for an M6 from Tom a couple or so years ago. Maybe a bit longer (once you get past 21 time flies LOL). A more accomodating 'real gentleman' would be difficult to find on this earth. The transaction including spending the money was actualy a pleasure and the product was no more than I expected...Perfect from the moment I clipped it to the camera.
If he hasn't been able to buy himself a decent Bentley Turbo by now he damn well should have.
And just in case he reads this..Tom I shall be back for another black rapidwinder in a couple of months if you can supply me with one.
Very best regards to you and yours
Peter.
 
Last edited:
Joined the M2 club today

Joined the M2 club today

I made the digital conversion many years ago. I own an M8 (and three other digicams) and have learned to enjoy the handling of a rangefinder, and am happy with the M8s file quality. However, I haven't enjoyed living with the M8's crop factor given its cost (and being unable/unwilling to afford an M9).

I also have been converting a pretty good percentage of my M8 files to B&W to make them look like "film". Eventually, it hit me that I could have a "full frame" camera for relatively cheap. All I have to do is buy a film M. But which one? I had pretty much decided on an M4-P when I ran across this thread. It really inspired me to start looking for an M2.

I found a few in the various forum classifieds and on eBay, but found it hard to commit. I promised myself that today (my birthday), I would try to find an M2 locally. I knew my local family-run camera store had a few used M3s, and held some bit of hope they'd have an M2. When I arrived at the store, I hurried to the used Leica case, and found only M3s. I almost left, but decided to ask about M2s. It turns out they did have one, but it was being kept in the back (glad I asked). The salesman walked out with a really beautiful 1958 M2, and for (only?) $500. Sold!

I spent the afternoon burning up some Plus-X. It sure felt weird to buy film again. Felt even weirder to load it into the M2 :) (thanks for the vids Tom). I'm interested to see how my very rusty "sunny 16" skills played out. But, and I don't know if it's the novelty, or what, but the feel of the camera was a revelation. Now I know why film M shooters complain about the M8. The M8 shutter sound is kind of a "clunk-whirrr". The M2s is just a "snip", followed by a "shhhhk", the timing of which is totally up to me.

I also found the M2 easy to handle "naked". The M8 has never felt right to me as a naked camera. It's slippery and heavy in the wrong ways, thus I shoot with it in a half-case to improve the handling. In contrast, the M2's 50+ year old covering is grippier, and the camera seems to just balance better. It's very shootable "naked", but I'll still probably put it in a half-case for protection.

Admittedly, I'm not looking forward to waiting and paying for my dev/scan processing. I've been spoiled by the immediacy of digital. I do realize I could do this at home, but scanning sounds like a royal pain in the butt.

OK, I could go on forever, but I just wanted to say thanks to everyone for this thread. I'm going to need a bigger camera bag!

Here's a snapshot of the family:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mathomas/4526420535/sizes/o/
 
scanning isn't so bad. and, there's something very therapeutic in processing one's own film. nice kit, btw.

mathomas said:
I made the digital conversion many years ago. I own an M8 (and three other digicams) and have learned to enjoy the handling of a rangefinder, and am happy with the M8s file quality. However, I haven't enjoyed living with the M8's crop factor given its cost (and being unable/unwilling to afford an M9).

I also have been converting a pretty good percentage of my M8 files to B&W to make them look like "film". Eventually, it hit me that I could have a "full frame" camera for relatively cheap. All I have to do is buy a film M. But which one? I had pretty much decided on an M4-P when I ran across this thread. It really inspired me to start looking for an M2.

I found a few in the various forum classifieds and on eBay, but found it hard to commit. I promised myself that today (my birthday), I would try to find an M2 locally. I knew my local family-run camera store had a few used M3s, and held some bit of hope they'd have an M2. When I arrived at the store, I hurried to the used Leica case, and found only M3s. I almost left, but decided to ask about M2s. It turns out they did have one, but it was being kept in the back (glad I asked). The salesman walked out with a really beautiful 1958 M2, and for (only?) $500. Sold!

I spent the afternoon burning up some Plus-X. It sure felt weird to buy film again. Felt even weirder to load it into the M2 :) (thanks for the vids Tom). I'm interested to see how my very rusty "sunny 16" skills played out. But, and I don't know if it's the novelty, or what, but the feel of the camera was a revelation. Now I know why film M shooters complain about the M8. The M8 shutter sound is kind of a "clunk-whirrr". The M2s is just a "snip", followed by a "shhhhk", the timing of which is totally up to me.

I also found the M2 easy to handle "naked". The M8 has never felt right to me as a naked camera. It's slippery and heavy in the wrong ways, thus I shoot with it in a half-case to improve the handling. In contrast, the M2's 50+ year old covering is grippier, and the camera seems to just balance better. It's very shootable "naked", but I'll still probably put it in a half-case for protection.

Admittedly, I'm not looking forward to waiting and paying for my dev/scan processing. I've been spoiled by the immediacy of digital. I do realize I could do this at home, but scanning sounds like a royal pain in the butt.

OK, I could go on forever, but I just wanted to say thanks to everyone for this thread. I'm going to need a bigger camera bag!

Here's a snapshot of the family:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mathomas/4526420535/sizes/o/
Click to expand...
 
This thread is a killer. I recently received and recovered (griptac) an M3 - a justifiable purchase to mate with my hex 50/1.2. I figure the ltd hex body is my 'M2' - general purpose. But the lust.... [Note to self - Must get scanner first!]
 
Last edited:
you don't really need to get the scanner first. you can always scan on a rainy day the enormous backlog of film you should shoot if you get the M2 first.

flip said:
This thread is a killer. I recently received and recovered (griptac) an M3 - a justifiable purchase to mate with my hex 50/1.2. I figure the ltd hex body is my 'M2' - general purpose. But the lust.... [Note to self - Must get scanner first!]
Click to expand...
 
TWoK said:
... As for my M2, it seems all lenses only couple to .8 on it. Now I'm worried.
Click to expand...
Interesting, and I wonder if your M2 is simply different than, say, mine... or if your RF is a bit gummy at the short-focus end of its movement.

My M2 is a button-rewind 935xxx, and with two ZM wide angles that focus to 0.5m, the RF will track down to just under 0.7m. The M8 will track with those same lenses down to about 0.64m.
 
Last edited:
mathomas said:
I'm going to need a bigger camera bag!
Click to expand...

Are you really? Wait a few rolls of film before buying one! I've spent a nice weekend driving and walking through "Mecklenburgische Seenplatte" in Germany w/ my DSLR bag, my TLR bag and my "new" Bessa - and I realized, that I need a SMALLER bag - or none at all. A rangefinder hanging on your neck is everything you need - well, and couple of rolls of film in your pockets..

However, enjoy your M2, as I do hope to enjoy it in the future myself.
 
Just sharing the love...

Just sharing the love...

Recently sprung a light leak. Still love it though.
 

Attachments

  • ILUVM2.jpg
    ILUVM2.jpg
    57.6 KB · Views: 0
andreios said:
Are you really? Wait a few rolls of film before buying one! I've spent a nice weekend driving and walking through "Mecklenburgische Seenplatte" in Germany w/ my DSLR bag, my TLR bag and my "new" Bessa - and I realized, that I need a SMALLER bag - or none at all. A rangefinder hanging on your neck is everything you need - well, and couple of rolls of film in your pockets..

However, enjoy your M2, as I do hope to enjoy it in the future myself.
Click to expand...

I think you're onto something -- one reason I went to an M8 was to avoid the size of my DSLR gear (and its effect on the folks I photograph) and the giant bag to carry it. Now with the M2 added to the M8, and the three or four lenses I'd like to carry, I am edging back to an SLR-sized bag (not quite, really).

Anyway, it has struck me that I should try to carry even less. Just the M8 or just the M2. Just one lens at a time. Interesting thought -- thanks...
 
mathomas said:
I think you're onto something -- one reason I went to an M8 was to avoid the size of my DSLR gear (and its effect on the folks I photograph) and the giant bag to carry it. Now with the M2 added to the M8, and the three or four lenses I'd like to carry, I am edging back to an SLR-sized bag (not quite, really).

Anyway, it has struck me that I should try to carry even less. Just the M8 or just the M2. Just one lens at a time. Interesting thought -- thanks...
Click to expand...

I recently went to a local leather shop and had them custom make me a strap, so that it would be exactly long enough for me to wear the M2 sling style and have it rest just on the top of my hip. I can walk for hours with the camera, a 35 f/2.5 skopar, and a few rolls of tri-x in my pocket without ever feeling burdened by the camera, and full of confidence knowing I have the camera I need to capture whatever may come in front of me. At first I really wanted a 50 to go with that 35, but after coming to terms with the simplicity of that setup, I've loved it. I'd recommend giving something along those lines a try--truly liberating.
 
...still loving it.

...still loving it.

I'm glad to see so many M2 owners enjoying their photography as the M2 is a perfect tool for this endeavor.
Someone once told me, "if ever you observe someone struggling to accomplish a task, either they do not know what they are doing or they do not have the right tool for the job."
In my experience, the M2 gets out of the way of my photography, allowing me to focus on capturing the image I see, rather than the tool I am using. It is odd that the times I enjoy photography the most are the times when it becomes intuitive and I am not so aware of being a "photographer".
Sadly, when I struggle the most with photography it is not because I do not have the right tool :bang:
 
I'm back in the M2 club
just got a 1962 Beauty ...It 'FEELS' sooo Good to just have the Basics in an 'M' ....Smoooooth & Easy :D
 
Last edited:
Thanx Erik & Sug...;)

TSSS....Tres Sexy Setup, Sug
Is that the 2.8 35 Biogon...the lens lokks Beautuful on the M2
 
helenhill said:
I'm back in the M2 club
just got a 1962 Beauty ...It 'FEELS' sooo Good to just have the Basics in an 'M' ....Smoooooth & Easy :D
Click to expand...

Glad you are down and out with a M2, HH! I am sure you will love it and that your pictures will ooze the delight you take putting it in front of your sensitive eye!


helenhill said:
.....TSSS....Tres Sexy Setup, Sug
Is that the 2.8 35 Biogon...the lens lokks Beautuful on the M2
Click to expand...

No need to say it, we all know it, sug does 'sexy' in all that he does ;)
 
Threads like these need a warning sign, I need to promise to myself to use my Zorki for a year before even thinking about getting an M2!
 
Thanks Helen & Thomas. :)

Yes it's C-Biogon 35/2.8 and it sure works nicely with the M2. :D

Alpacaman, Really? :p

All shot with M2 & C-Biogon 35/2.8, pushed to 1600.

4966214692_d6bb4d627c_b.jpg


4923136752_aa3f348fa9_b.jpg


4925616710_3ee34a6b76_b.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom