M3 or M6 x0.85 ?

[alexz]

Well, now that using my M3 for about a year and half, a weird, seditious thoughts begun bothering my mind...
Perhaps I'd be more comfortable with M6 x0.85 ? for 50mm or longer ?

A little background: I acquired an M3 after shooting for about a year-two with my M6. Picked M3 mostly for larger magnification to handle 50mm and longer focal lengths, but also to feel that reportedly legendary smoothness of mechanical operation.
Picked the one that apparently went through quite a lot of workful years, had it CLAed and repaired by Youxin and that turned to be the most smooth camera I probably will have in my life. Just a pleasure to hear and feel winding, shutter release "flop", etc...
Externally it was also re-covered by Youxin so will probably work through another 50 years without a glitch.
Handles great my 50mm cron and 90mm elmarit, however, I notice the vewfinder, being spotless and bright, yet a bit less contrasty comparably to my M6 and such is focusing patch.
The patch is indeed noticeably larger then that of M6, and in daylight is very easy to focus, however I noticed I tend to pick my M6 if low-light work in expected, just due to a little bit of higher contrast allowing easier focusing (even with smaller patch) in low light.

So, here is the question: perhaps I'd be better to try out/switch for M6 x85 ? That one seems to offer a good trade-off of bright/contrasty finder/focusing patch and magnification that is larger then of my regular M6 yet a bit lower then that of M3 ?

Is M6 x0.85 indeed nearly as useful with 90mm lens as M3 with its x0.91 magnification ? What your experience tell you ?

 

[ferider]

You'll have to deal with more flare and smaller framelines. If you upgrade to an MP finder the M6 is nice. Still nothing beats an M3 for 50 and longer 🙂

 

[Rafael]

I had an M6 Classic 0.85x for some time. With the upgraded vf, the M6 is a really nice camera. What it offers that your M3 does not is a meter. If you need/want the meter, then try the M6. If you don't need/want a meter, then I would hang on to your M3 for the reasons listed by Roland as well as for the fact that you have had the camera CLA'd and seem to really like it.

 

[alexz]

Too bad there is no chance to try out that M6 x0.85 beforehand making any decision...
I realize all 0.85 are TTL models. Do they also suffer from flare issue just like regular M6 ? Somehow I got the impression that 0.85 version has improved finder already in this respect...am I wrong ?
As about smaller frames - this is true of course, I guess the frames will be somewhere in between M3 and M6...having said that, I'm a spectacles wearer, M3 50mm frames appear nearly at the very edges for me in M3, I'd prefer a bit smaller frame to have outside visible. This is quite similar situation I have with 35mm frames in my M6...

 

[alexz]

I had an M6 Classic 0.85x for some time. With the upgraded vf, the M6 is a really nice camera. What it offers that your M3 does not is a meter. If you need/want the meter, then try the M6. If you don't need/want a meter, then I would hang on to your M3 for the reasons listed by Roland as well as for the fact that you have had the camera CLA'd and seem to really like it.

Well, meter is not the major issue here, in most cases I rely on my Digisix anyway even when shooting with M6.
I like very much the smoothness of my M3, however would certainly prefer it to be black and the patch to be more contrasty.
Perhaps I'll need to consider the total cost of M6 0.85 + vf upgrade ....that would also be a factor ...

 

[Rafael]

I realize all 0.85 are TTL models.

Actually, there were about 3000 M6 Classic bodies made with the 0.85x finder in 1998 (see HERE).

 

[Matthew Runkel]

The finder in the .85 M6 TTLs and the small number of .85 M6 Classics is not the improved finder. Moreover, this finder has the reputation of being the most susceptible to flare and RF-patch whiteout--moreso than its .72 and .58 counterparts. User reports differ as to how often the problems occur and how disruptive they are.

I would not expect an M6 patch to have better contrast in low light than an M3 patch. It may be that your M3 has a dim patch, something that is notoriously hard to correct. Such a camera would be perfectly usable in daylight, as yours is. If you do have an M3 with a dim patch, another solution to consider is to replace it with a different M3 that does not have the problem.

 

[peter_n]

The finder in the .85 M6 TTLs and the small number of .85 M6 Classics is not the improved finder. Moreover, this finder has the reputation of being the most susceptible to flare and RF-patch whiteout--more so than its .72 and .58 counterparts. User reports differ as to how often the problems occur and how disruptive they are.

My first Leica was a 0.72x M6TTL and I didn't experience the whiteout until about a year in. I had the camera for about four years and it didn't occur that often, but when it did happen, you absolutely couldn't use the camera, it was really bad.

 

[Turtle]

If not concerned with the meter, stick with the M3 IMO. No flare, larger frame lines.

 

[RichardB]

They BOTH will take the SAME picture which is the important thing rather than patch flare, gear smoothness et al.
I have a late(over 1M serial #) M3 and an M6 Classic 0.85.
In terms of finder, you can't beat an M3, clear, bright, no flare, period but as mentioned no meter. The M6 0.85 will flare but so what? Its a little like the 'Princess and the Pea'! Its a small difference.
I would stop concerning yourself over differences and use what you have unless you want a built in meter. M6 Classic 0.85 cameras are not hard to find for sale.-Dick

 

[Pherdinand]

i was pondering the same question for the same reason (using 50 and 90). Had only an m2.

In the end, i kept the m2 🙂 and went the cheap Bessa way.
I'm not saying it's a bettr way. It' sjust what I did and it worked out for me very well.

 

[larmarv916]

I have both the M3 ( .92) and M6TTL (.85) and the accuracy for me on the 135 and 90 is very visible. I like the M3 much better..never any "white outs" and also the image for any of the 50-90-135 is always a faster focus and no touch up and at wide open that means "No Excuses" or missing my target the first time. I also find the ability to attach a viewfinder for wide angle lenses is good as I just preset the focal point..and then the meter on the M6TTL does not really work well with the 28 or wider lenses anyway.

I also find that the M6 really is designed to be perfect for a 35mm lens..for me it is almost a 1 lens camera. Good Luck

 

[Turtle]

They BOTH will take the SAME picture which is the important thing rather than patch flare, gear smoothness et al.
I have a late(over 1M serial #) M3 and an M6 Classic 0.85.
In terms of finder, you can't beat an M3, clear, bright, no flare, period but as mentioned no meter. The M6 0.85 will flare but so what? Its a little like the 'Princess and the Pea'! Its a small difference.
I would stop concerning yourself over differences and use what you have unless you want a built in meter. M6 Classic 0.85 cameras are not hard to find for sale.-Dick

I disagree. I own a M3 and 0.85 M6 and feel the flare is a big issue if you often shoot into the light. I recently did some shooting inside with bright windows behind the subjects and the flare was a pig. I could just work around it but it made focusing slower and less certain. I will get mine upgraded at some point, prob whenever it needs work done.

 

[Kozhe]

I agree with the M6 flare being a problem. It´s something you can get used with, but when you have an M3-2-4 to compare it´s a pita.

The M6 "should" be more reliable (since it´s newer, not rocket science) if you don´t feel like sending your cameras for a cla once in a while. I also prefer the touch and handling of my black M6 to any chrome classic M I have/had, but mechanically the older bodies are smoother and better.

 

[alexz]

Thank you all, guys, every comment is helpful.
So the common wisdom of the community suggests to keep my M3 and probably make little more efforts to get used to its focusing in low light.
In fact, I do not see my M3's vf neither it patch to be faulty in any way, I realize they are naturally little bit less contrasty then these of contemporary cameras such as M4, M6...
Silver finish of M3 (as opposite to my preferred black) is also something I probably need to get used...I noticed it draws a little bit more attention from the audience then black ones, albeit rarely anyone recognizes what it is actually.

Today I have a wedding being invited as a guest, took both bodies with me. Perhaps this is excellent case to put in test the usability of M6 against M3 in low light conditions, in particular focusing-wise...

 

[peter_n]

If you have the light coming into the lens at an angle it can be a serious enough problem that you miss the shot(s). I would rather have a camera that didn't do that.

 

[35mmdelux]

Anyone of these Leicas is great and you'll just have to go thru the learning curve. The black:silver connundrum? Overblown but I prefer black as I prefer a black suit to silver sharkskin.

M6TTL .85 has the worst VF....MP VF replcement = $250-300. A non-starter here.

 

[Turtle]

I have never used a 0.72 M6 only the 0.85 and anecdotal evidence suggests that the 0.85 is noticeably worse than the 0.72 in terms of whiteout. I find that under certain lighting mine whites out and I literally cannot get clarity no matter how i reposition my eye. Only under lighting where the there is light to the rear and side of the subject normally and the subject is dark and the lightsource v bright.

 

[alexz]

OK, I'm slowly getting the point..🙂
It appears the only bearable replacement (if any) of a good M3 would probably be MP 0.85 (which sounds to be way out of my affordability) or M6 0.85 that features MPs upgraded RF (also tends to stretch to about 2k$)...
In fact, at a times I notice that flare issue in my 0.72 M6, but so far not very often...(actually I rarely shot into bright spot lights)....so if the issue is more severe on M6 0.85 - I'd probably be better with M3...

 

[kshapero]

Used M7's with 0.85 VF look pretty affordable compared to MP's for some reason.