M3 Owner Satisfaction

M3 Owner Satisfaction

  • Total voters
    120
  • Poll closed .
ferider said:
Correct. :) All stock, except disc breaks, 70 Mach II front seats with head rests, and 3-row radiator.

Roland.
Click to expand...

Cool. My Dad was a Ford engineer who used to bring home test vehicles back in the 1960s. I remember him bringing home a prototype 1962 Falcon Sprint fitted with a 289 hi-po. Fast, cool car, even more-so when you were 11 years old.

Jim B.
 
I like my M3 a lot. I think I prefer DS to SS, though as my only Leica I guess I can't tell for sure. If I want to shoot wider than a 50 I use something else (usually a Hexar RF). One day, maybe, if I stumble on a DS M3 with a no-good finder, I'll have one fitted with an MP finder. That would make a good pair.

...Mike
 
Last edited:
I really like my M3, though when I bought it somewhere in its life the viewfinder was switched out for a .72. I like it so much I'm keeping my eyes peeled for a second M3 when the right time comes around.
 
My M3 is hands-down my favorite 35mm camera. I like it so much that I bought another so I'd never have to be without one, just in case one gets lost, stolen, or has to go in for service. I've owned and shot with several other M cameras, but never liked them nearly as much. My M6 flared so much it was nearly useless half the time; the M4-P's finder was slightly better, but for me the camera was still a poor comparison for the M3. Give me that big, bright, high-magnification finder any day. (Both of my M3's have great, clean, crystal clear finders, but I do understand that some aren't as great these days- find a clean one.)

Now- I use a 50mm lens most of the time. If I liked the 35mm FL more, I'd get an M2; as it is, I make do with a goggled 35mm lens. Admittedly, the M3 is less than perfect with 35mm- and this is a really popular and useful FL for many folks. But IMO, for literally every other focal length, the M3 has a better finder than any other M camera. The smooth operation and build quality of the classic M's is just icing on the cake.

If you ask me, Leitz got it nearly perfect with the first M camera, and have just been muddling it up ever since.

(Now, if they could just make a 1:1 magnification finder that could still fit in great 35mm framelines and show good, parallax corrected 35mm, 50mm, or 90mm lines by themselves, that would be my idea of the perfect RF viewfinder.)
 
sepiareverb said:
I've not had much chance to play with mine, it went right for a big CLA. But I can see already it is going to be my go to body for the 90 & 135 lenses hands down.

It's a '62, and is in similar shape to the '62 GMC pickup in my yard- "works", but needs work!
Click to expand...

Same experience with mine - recently acquired, great, smooth camera but it's in for pinholes in shutter curtain being fixed. It's a 1960 SS, the only body I think I'll shoot with 90mm with any confidence.
 
My first Leica is the M3 and it's still my most loved and used M. I'm a 50 guys through and through so nothing beat the M3, bright, clear, large frame and dead on accuracy. 85mm is another fav focal length and the 0.9 VF is god-send for that.
 
Beemermark said:
The only real advantage to the R100RS was you could do any repair you needed to with duct tape and bailing wire.
Click to expand...

Well, that and it's probably the ultimate sports-tourer (I'll come back to Leicas in the second para). I've just come back from Arles: 500 miles each way, two up, and I had trouble keeping it below 130 km/h (80 mph) on the way. Design speed 200+ km/h (125 mph); cruising speed (in Germany) 180 km/h (110-115 mph); how much more do you really want? Or more accurately, how much more are you going to use on anything like a regular basis?

To return to the Leica M3, it seems that (almost) everyone agrees it is the smoothest ever BUT I'll cheerfully put up with a tiny loss of smoothness in my MP in return for 35mm and 75mm frames (my favourites on film), the Leicavit, and the meter. Also the MP is 40+ years newer. And buying an MP keeps Leica in business; buying an M3 doesn't.

I have seen it alleged that one reason why the MP is less smooth is that it uses steel gears where the M3 uses brass, in the interests of durability. The argument about durability seems unlikely, as I don't recall seeing many worn-out M3s, but one thing about which I am reasonably confident is that the MP is a LOT simpler and cheaper to assemble than an M3, which was conceived in an era when skilled labour was far cheaper in relative terms than today. The least smooth Leica I've ever owned is my M4-P and it's still pretty smooth by most manufacturers' standards.

Cheers,

Roger
 
I believe the switch-over to steel gears from brass was to accommodate motor winders. The motors put too much wear and tear on the brass, the steel holds up better.

I prefer the brass smoothness of the M3 and M2.
 
It's my go-to camera and it has destroyed my G.A.S. for 35mm camera's.

My Hasselblad 500C/M has destroyed my G.A.S. for 120 camera's.

Now I need to save some cash for large format :p :p
 
Roger Hicks said:
To return to the Leica M3, it seems that (almost) everyone agrees it is the smoothest ever BUT I'll cheerfully put up with a tiny loss of smoothness in my MP in return for 35mm and 75mm frames (my favourites on film), the Leicavit, and the meter. Also the MP is 40+ years newer. And buying an MP keeps Leica in business; buying an M3 doesn't.

Roger
Click to expand...

Agreed. As much as I like my M3, when I go off to take pictures, I grab the MP. Just a much more useable camera. Plus I consider the MP build quality to be the equal of my old DS M3.

Jim B.
 
Brian Sweeney said:
I believe the switch-over to steel gears from brass was to accommodate motor winders. The motors put too much wear and tear on the brass, the steel holds up better.

I prefer the brass smoothness of the M3 and M2.
Click to expand...

Dear Brian,

Of course! I should have remembered that!

But when it comes to smoothness, I don't think there's anything in it between the M2 and MP: I suspect there may have been some selective assembly with the M3, as there was with the screw-mount cameras.

There's also the point that the newest M3 I've ever used was about 10 years old, and therefore nicely bedded in; my M4-P is now a lot smoother than it was when it was new.

Cheers,

Roger
 
I have a very early M3 and I have to say it's a magnificent camera and is by far the quietest smoothest rangefinder I have ever used!

It's definitely the OM-1 of rangefinders! :angel:
 
I have newer M's but do find the M3 is the most satisfying camera to use, in that it feels more special to handle and I've taken some photo's on it that have surprised me with their look. I know that's really down to the lens, film and subject but nevertheless when I look at my personal favourite photos, a disproportionately high number were taken on the M3.
 
If you prefer to use the 50 or even the 90 and dare I say it the 135, the M3 is the best candidate to use of all the M bodies. I've used M3DS, M2, M4, M4-2 (currently), M5 (friends), M6 (friends), M7 (friends) and MP (friends). It was the smoothest M I've used with the best finder for me (40/50 is my most used FL). If it had the 40 and 75 framelines, why I would be like a happy pig rolling in mud :rolleyes:
 
Fully Satisfied. Leica M3, Summicron 50mm f/2 rigid (1), TriX and printed on Ilford MG IV.

3721576130_363a30b105_b.jpg
 
Tonight I had a shoot that would probably need something longer than my 15mm Heliar so I stuck my 85mm f/2 Nikkor on my M3. Inside the baseplate was a sticker I'd put there when I had M4 style (PC) flash contacts installed and had it CLA'd. 1969 it said. Since then I've replaced the crumbling Vulcanite with a Cameraleather skin but the camera is still truckin' along nicely. I guess I'll have to bite the bullet and spring for another CLA in forty years or so and pray that the Cameraleather skin lasts that long. I keep telling folks than I'm planning on crossing over to the Dark Side and goin' digital as soon as my M's wear out. I might not live long enough!
 
Mine had a dim VF and was hard to focus in low light. So I was not satisfied. Never occurred to me this could be fixed so I sold it cheap - back around 1980. Very satisfied now with my m6 bodies and my m4p
 
A well used M3 was my first Leica in 1990 when I was 34 years old. I found I could focus it in low light MUCH better than my beloved old Nikon F. A few years later I got an early M6 and used that mostly for many years due to the ease of the meter. In the past few years I have gone back to the M3. Most of my shooting is in locations where I know what the light will be. The M3 is simple, smooth, a great finder and an old friend. So in 2009 I have five M cameras but my main one is my first M3 from 1955 with a 50mm Summilux asph from 2005. Fifty years of the best of Leica. I will never own a better camera. Joe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom