M2 or R3M?

from my experience...
having owned a couple of leicas and several bessas...
i prefer the r4a as a film camera choice...
and the rd1 (bessa body) as a digital camera.

leicas may be great but not for me.

as for ego...the red dot makes men do and say funny things.
 
There would be 2 additional questions:
1- do you want to shoot street photos or only portraits/landscape?
2- do you think you might use a 35mm lens too in the future?

If you think you would like to try street photography, forget about both ang get the R3A - you will not miss any shots because of fiddling with your exposure
If you think you would want a 35mm lens at times, the M2 obviously would be better suited
 
I think it´s important how well you can do without an in-camera meter. I have an R2A and an M2, and unless I know that the lighting conditions will be staying fairly constant, I tend to take the R2A with me (if not both). I´m going to give the M2 a fair chance because it´s a lovely tool, but if I can´t get to grips with the whole process of picture-taking with it then I´d rather just stick with the R2A, which is also a great camera.
 
Fenwick said:
Cant decide M2 or R3M
Click to expand...
If you can get both in your hands, choose whichever feels better for you. If not, go with the Bessa. The 1:1 viewfinder is simply excellent, the slowish lens (50/3.5) means you will have absolutely no problems focusing, and you even get warranty.
 
I have no problem focussing close with 50mm at 1.4, 3.5 will be easy - and the R3 viewfinder is brilliant. Having an onboard meter is convenient. I haven't seen an M2 so I wouldn't know about its VF or handling, but having looked at an M6 I remember that the VF wasn't particularly spectacular to me. As has been said - you have to have a look, see them in the flesh as they are quite different in handling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom