jkjod
Well-known
I currently only own a M3 and a 50...but have been hankering over the 35mm focal length as of late. I had a spat with a goggled v1 summicron and the prism was so out of alignment that I had to send it back. But the focal length was nice, something I think I could get along with. Now I am considering getting a M2 to have both frame lines available.
Here is my questions (or comments, or blabbering):
I have never had the M3 viewfinder flare, does the M2 viewfinder have the same flare resistance?
I love the M3 viewfinder and the feel of the camera in general. I did at one time have a .85 M7 but did not get along with that camera at all. The M3 just had a certain "somethin, somethin." I'm worried I won't get along with the M2 either...that being said, I don't see myself ever using the 135 frame lines of the M3 and my eventual plan is to have 35/50/90. I have always heard the M2 and M3 have similar build quality, but I'm not certain. The M7 was solid for sure, just had more of a connection with the M3.
Having only shot with the 50, I don't know which will be my primary go to lens...the 35 or 50. Somebody talk me into, or out of, an M2. Am I going to be mad or displeased with the 50 on the M2? Thanks in advance,
Jordan
Here is my questions (or comments, or blabbering):
I have never had the M3 viewfinder flare, does the M2 viewfinder have the same flare resistance?
I love the M3 viewfinder and the feel of the camera in general. I did at one time have a .85 M7 but did not get along with that camera at all. The M3 just had a certain "somethin, somethin." I'm worried I won't get along with the M2 either...that being said, I don't see myself ever using the 135 frame lines of the M3 and my eventual plan is to have 35/50/90. I have always heard the M2 and M3 have similar build quality, but I'm not certain. The M7 was solid for sure, just had more of a connection with the M3.
Having only shot with the 50, I don't know which will be my primary go to lens...the 35 or 50. Somebody talk me into, or out of, an M2. Am I going to be mad or displeased with the 50 on the M2? Thanks in advance,
Jordan
madNbad
Well-known
Take a look at the M2 & MP (Modern) thread.
jkjod
Well-known
I was actually just reading through it. I was just thinking, in the "holy grail" thread that was up recently I even said my dream camera was a MP with 35/50/90. I highly doubt I will ever be able to afford a MP...but a M2 with VC meter will get pretty darn close. In other words, I think I've just answered my own question. Sometimes it just takes writing it down to figure it out. Thanks.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
If you like the M3 with a 50mm you will like an M2 with a 35mm too. Then, later, you will enjoy an M2 with a 50 also ... The M2 with a 50mm works very fine, believe me ... If you are a two lens shooter - 50mm and 35mm - the M2 is the camera to get.
Erik.
Erik.
jim_jm
Well-known
Another vote for the M2 here. It's perfect with a 35mm lens - uncluttered finder and I've only had the RF flare once in a dimly lit church with spot lighting.
I also use a VCII meter when I don't want to carry a handheld one. Quick and easy and looks nice on the M2.
I've only used an M3 briefly, but I believe the build quality to be just about identical. M2 was only considered to be the "budget" alternative to the M3 because it had a simpler VF/RF design, no self-timer (at first), button rewind and a manual-reset frame counter.
I've read that many photojournalists preferred the M2 because of the 35 framelines.
I also use a VCII meter when I don't want to carry a handheld one. Quick and easy and looks nice on the M2.
I've only used an M3 briefly, but I believe the build quality to be just about identical. M2 was only considered to be the "budget" alternative to the M3 because it had a simpler VF/RF design, no self-timer (at first), button rewind and a manual-reset frame counter.
I've read that many photojournalists preferred the M2 because of the 35 framelines.
jim_jm
Well-known
I also use a 50 and 90 on my M2 all the time. No problems at all.
lukitas
second hand noob
I have both, M3 and M2. Never noticed any flare in the M2 viewfinder.
In fact, the viewfinder of the M2 is what made me fall in love with Leica.
Started out with a Summitar on it, gave me one of the best shots of my life :
(this was taken at a concert, lots of point sources of light, don't remember any flare in the viewfinder)
When I got the M3, I put a Jupiter 12 on the M2, but I wasn't too happy with the 35 mm field of view. Not wide enough. I now have a 28mm Ultron on it, and this combination works well, as it should; after all, the M4 and later have 28mm frame lines, and both have the .72 viewfinder.
In fact, the viewfinder of the M2 is what made me fall in love with Leica.
Started out with a Summitar on it, gave me one of the best shots of my life :
(this was taken at a concert, lots of point sources of light, don't remember any flare in the viewfinder)
When I got the M3, I put a Jupiter 12 on the M2, but I wasn't too happy with the 35 mm field of view. Not wide enough. I now have a 28mm Ultron on it, and this combination works well, as it should; after all, the M4 and later have 28mm frame lines, and both have the .72 viewfinder.
Pioneer
Veteran
Other than GAS is there any reason you need to buy an M2? It is a lot less expensive to mount a brightline external viewfinder for 35mm on top and continue shooting.
Huss
Veteran
It's what I do with my M3, I use the excellent Voigtlander metal finder.
Of course I then got GAS and picked up an M5 anyway...
Pioneer
Veteran
Yeah. I have and love my M3, but I also have an M-A on order that I am impatiently waiting on so I'm not one who should talk.
Of course if it doesn't live up to my expectations, which are pretty high because of my M3, it may end up going back.
jkjod
Well-known
Pioneer, I know there are plenty of people much more talented than me that use a M3 and an external viewfinder with no problems. For some reason, I just don't think I would get along with it too well. If I do go down the path of the M2, my M3 will probably get sold so this will offset some of the cost of a different body. I can only afford one M body, unfortunately. I would for sure love to keep both. I am perfectly happy with the M3 and VM 50 1.5, I just find myself wanting something a tad wider at times. Do i "need" it? No, you are right on the money here - I do this as a hobby and strictly for fun, I'm definitely no pro. But it would be something nice to try.
I appreciate all the comments and opinions. That is why I love this place!
I appreciate all the comments and opinions. That is why I love this place!
jkjod
Well-known
Well...I took the leap. Found a M2 I just couldn't pass up. If everything looks OK once I get it, I will have a very clean DAG CLA'd DS M3 for sale if anyone is interested.
Jaans
Well-known
I second that. I have owned both an M3 and an M2. I fell in love with the M2 due to the viewfinder. It felt like the perfect camera. On an aesthetic note, I also preferred the M2 'recessed' viewfinder window as opposed to the M3. Also, I prefer the frame counter on the M2.
My dream camera is the MP3.
M
markman
Guest
While the M3 still has the most flare-resistant rangefinder patch (better still than even a current MP), the M2 is superb too. And having just one set of frame lines at a time in the viewfinder makes for such a clear, uncluttered view on the M2.
With all of that said, I agree with the use of bright finders on an M3 for focal lengths wider than its 50mm frame lines. For street work, I'm usually using hyper focal distance at f8 with a 28mm, so I'm not constantly focusing. Therefore, no need for me to look in the M3's rangefinder. I just look through the accessory, 28mm bright finder to frame, which is a truly uncluttered view (just frame lines for the chosen focal length).
Big advantage with the M2 and using the main viewfinder for the 35mm though - it keeps the accessory shoe free for the VC meter, without having to use multi-shoe adapters to mount both a bright line finder and the VC meter.
With all of that said, I agree with the use of bright finders on an M3 for focal lengths wider than its 50mm frame lines. For street work, I'm usually using hyper focal distance at f8 with a 28mm, so I'm not constantly focusing. Therefore, no need for me to look in the M3's rangefinder. I just look through the accessory, 28mm bright finder to frame, which is a truly uncluttered view (just frame lines for the chosen focal length).
Big advantage with the M2 and using the main viewfinder for the 35mm though - it keeps the accessory shoe free for the VC meter, without having to use multi-shoe adapters to mount both a bright line finder and the VC meter.
jkjod
Well-known
Got the M2 today, I don't think I'm going to have a problem with the 50 frame lines...I'm going to run a roll this weekend and see how it goes. I have one question though, i can turn my 50 while its on the camera and it activates the 90 frame lines. This wasn't an issue with the M3, I'm curious if there is a way to make it slightly tighter? I see there is a screw on the mount release, will this do anything at all? I think the M2 is going to be a keeper, the feel is very similar to the M3. Excited to get a few rolls through it!
jkjod
Well-known
And thanks again for all the advice!