FrankS
Registered User
Let's say that the built in meter of the M6 accounts for the $300-400 price difference between an good clean M3 and a good clean M6. If you take that meter out of the equation, which camera would you choose?
M3 wins out on its viewfinder and build quality, the M6 wins out on more versitility in framelines, and younger age.
Any other ideas? On Sunday at the camera show/sale, I don't know what I would do if I found a clean M6 for a good price, even though I'm going there to look for an M3.
M3 wins out on its viewfinder and build quality, the M6 wins out on more versitility in framelines, and younger age.
Any other ideas? On Sunday at the camera show/sale, I don't know what I would do if I found a clean M6 for a good price, even though I'm going there to look for an M3.
As the classic M6s are getting up in age, a CLA may be needed for either camera. Probably more so the M3 though. There also is the issue of decementing of the M3 RF mirror. Being 45+ years old, that becomes an issue that will not be faced by the M6.
K
kjoebek
Guest
Go for the M3!!!
It'a better investment in the long term. The M3 made with more care and the quality control at the time of production was fare better then to day.
Last, the M3 have a charm that the M6 don't have.
It'a better investment in the long term. The M3 made with more care and the quality control at the time of production was fare better then to day.
Last, the M3 have a charm that the M6 don't have.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
I'd go with the M6. I like wide angle lenses, but then it depends on what lenses YOU use.
peter_n
Veteran
Right. If you use a 35mm lens a lot the M3 isn't much use to you. Personally I would go for the most recent M I could afford.
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
I understand the "mystique" of the M3, but the details that keep me from one are merely practical and were already "fixed" in the M6 and M6TTL. Here you have them.
-First, framelines.
-Second, loading; it's easier and faster with the recent models. Sure, someone will spring here saying that he can load his M3 in the dark, but those of us, regular mortals, aren't interested on the art of loading as we are on actually loading.
-Third, film rewind. Some claim the little tilted crank breaks... and it will if abused, but it sure beats the knob in the M2 and M3.
In addition to the risks mentioned by Rover about the decementing of the mirror, and the rangefinder mechanism being old and a bit brittle. To be quite honest, the viewfinder isn't as impressive a difference to me, and I had the chance to compare them... I guess it'll be different when I shoot with one. But, in any case, I would favor the M6 over the M3.
The good thing about the M6 is that even if the meter dies, it is still a mechanical camera. In fact, it turns itself into an M4!
-First, framelines.
-Second, loading; it's easier and faster with the recent models. Sure, someone will spring here saying that he can load his M3 in the dark, but those of us, regular mortals, aren't interested on the art of loading as we are on actually loading.
-Third, film rewind. Some claim the little tilted crank breaks... and it will if abused, but it sure beats the knob in the M2 and M3.
In addition to the risks mentioned by Rover about the decementing of the mirror, and the rangefinder mechanism being old and a bit brittle. To be quite honest, the viewfinder isn't as impressive a difference to me, and I had the chance to compare them... I guess it'll be different when I shoot with one. But, in any case, I would favor the M6 over the M3.
The good thing about the M6 is that even if the meter dies, it is still a mechanical camera. In fact, it turns itself into an M4!
Frank, you have an M2 for the 35mm lens. The M3 cannot be beat for 50mm and 85/90mm focal length, especially fast telephoto's of F2.0 or so. The M6 without meter is essentially your M2.
If you want the meter: M6. Do not care about Meter: M3.
If you want the meter: M6. Do not care about Meter: M3.
denishr
アナログ侘・&#
Frank, the previous posters covered most of the bases.
Let me add a few remarks, if I may - I feel I have a right, since I own both
Viewfinder/framelines: depends entirely on your lens preferences. If you're looking for a "universal" body, then M6 is probably a better choice, meaning it's less restricting. It's not very precise for longer lenses, but at least you don't need an external finder or "goggled" lenses, as is the case with M3 and wider lenses. It also depends on the VF magnification - most M6 cameras come with the default .72 magnification (like the M2). If you really want to use longer lenses, and feel you have problems focusing, you can always get the "focusing magnifier" thingy (not cheap, though...) OTOH, I've never had problems focusing a 135 Hektor on my M2 (same magnification as M6). But, I usually shoot static objects with a 135
Loading: if you never loaded either of them, this is a non-issue, since both might be a bit difficult at first. I've learned the "Leica masochistic dance" or the "three-handed rap" (read: loading a Leica) on my M2. Got it right the first time, and never had any problems. It's a lot less fiddly than a Kiev 4A, for example.... M6 is relatively new to me, and I must admit that I load both my M2 and M3 a lot faster than the M6 - however strange it might seem... So, I guess this is again relative. I'll probably get used to M6 soon...
Rewinding film: unless you're in a big hurry, a couple of seconds more for the "old style" knob on the M3 isn't really that important. But, it's definitely slower than M6, and might be a problem with gloves (something you should take into consideration, I guess). But, since you're in Canada, and will probably also be shooting in winter, this might not be that bad - at least you won't be in danger of building up static electricity when rewinding too fast
The only issue, I think, is the actual condition of the camera. If you can test it prior to buying, it would be a big plus. Both cameras might have problems.
To sum things up, I'd NEVER buy a Leica (or anything that expensive) on a camera show, without testing it first and (possibly) having it checked. Yes, you can handle it in person, but are you sure you can find every defect in those couple of minutes you have it in your hands, without developing a roll of film you have shot using every possible speed setting? What about shutter capping? Light leaks? Flash sync? The camera might look wonderful, but you might get mighty disappointed when you get your first roll back.
I can only offer my recent experience - the M6 I bought from a photo.net member, who said the camera was CLA'd by Sherry two months ago (a BIG plus!). Said it had some intermittent light leaks.... fixed by Sherry. The person who sold it to me actually used it (a plus again). Also, he provided a 10-day money back guarantee - so it was sent to Brian for testing - and the camera passed all Brian's tests with flying colors (thanks, Brian!).
What I'm trying to say is that I'd rather buy a Leica "sight unseen" from a reputable RFF or photo.net member, than on a camera show. I've bought cameras on shows before, and I know how it is: usually you're too excited about it, and tend to overlook small (?) defects, in fear that someone else might snatch it
Sorry if my ramblings are more confusing than helping... I just wanted to say that both are good choices - it all depends on the actual condition of the camera.
Finally, looking back, it it were my first Leica, I'd probably go with the M6. The difference in price is not that great, and you get a metered camera, AND a camera that's about 30 years younger. The prices for well preserved, late model and fully working M3s are very close to M6s.
Denis
Let me add a few remarks, if I may - I feel I have a right, since I own both
Viewfinder/framelines: depends entirely on your lens preferences. If you're looking for a "universal" body, then M6 is probably a better choice, meaning it's less restricting. It's not very precise for longer lenses, but at least you don't need an external finder or "goggled" lenses, as is the case with M3 and wider lenses. It also depends on the VF magnification - most M6 cameras come with the default .72 magnification (like the M2). If you really want to use longer lenses, and feel you have problems focusing, you can always get the "focusing magnifier" thingy (not cheap, though...) OTOH, I've never had problems focusing a 135 Hektor on my M2 (same magnification as M6). But, I usually shoot static objects with a 135
Loading: if you never loaded either of them, this is a non-issue, since both might be a bit difficult at first. I've learned the "Leica masochistic dance" or the "three-handed rap" (read: loading a Leica) on my M2. Got it right the first time, and never had any problems. It's a lot less fiddly than a Kiev 4A, for example.... M6 is relatively new to me, and I must admit that I load both my M2 and M3 a lot faster than the M6 - however strange it might seem... So, I guess this is again relative. I'll probably get used to M6 soon...
Rewinding film: unless you're in a big hurry, a couple of seconds more for the "old style" knob on the M3 isn't really that important. But, it's definitely slower than M6, and might be a problem with gloves (something you should take into consideration, I guess). But, since you're in Canada, and will probably also be shooting in winter, this might not be that bad - at least you won't be in danger of building up static electricity when rewinding too fast
The only issue, I think, is the actual condition of the camera. If you can test it prior to buying, it would be a big plus. Both cameras might have problems.
To sum things up, I'd NEVER buy a Leica (or anything that expensive) on a camera show, without testing it first and (possibly) having it checked. Yes, you can handle it in person, but are you sure you can find every defect in those couple of minutes you have it in your hands, without developing a roll of film you have shot using every possible speed setting? What about shutter capping? Light leaks? Flash sync? The camera might look wonderful, but you might get mighty disappointed when you get your first roll back.
I can only offer my recent experience - the M6 I bought from a photo.net member, who said the camera was CLA'd by Sherry two months ago (a BIG plus!). Said it had some intermittent light leaks.... fixed by Sherry. The person who sold it to me actually used it (a plus again). Also, he provided a 10-day money back guarantee - so it was sent to Brian for testing - and the camera passed all Brian's tests with flying colors (thanks, Brian!).
What I'm trying to say is that I'd rather buy a Leica "sight unseen" from a reputable RFF or photo.net member, than on a camera show. I've bought cameras on shows before, and I know how it is: usually you're too excited about it, and tend to overlook small (?) defects, in fear that someone else might snatch it
Sorry if my ramblings are more confusing than helping... I just wanted to say that both are good choices - it all depends on the actual condition of the camera.
Finally, looking back, it it were my first Leica, I'd probably go with the M6. The difference in price is not that great, and you get a metered camera, AND a camera that's about 30 years younger. The prices for well preserved, late model and fully working M3s are very close to M6s.
Denis
T
Tim
Guest
Hmmmm.....
I think my choice would depend very much on the intended use. OK, the 35 and 28mm framelines are point 1, but even beyond that:
If I was looking for a camera to be my primary, everyday, carry everywhere camera I'd go for the M6. Hands down. Newer, more versatile with the extra framelines and built in meter. In fact, in that case I'd go for a M6TTL, and get the extras that gives (But I would say that, wouldn't I!!!)
If on the other hand I was looking for a lovely camera to have as one of many, to be taken out when it was appropriate - I'd get the best DS M3 I could find. They are just so lovely to hold and use, and as well as being an appreciating asset, they are a real landmark in camera history.
Oh, and I second Denis' comments about buying anything pricy at a camera show, btw. Unless it's a dealer at the show who's prepared to warranty his sale.
have fun!
I think my choice would depend very much on the intended use. OK, the 35 and 28mm framelines are point 1, but even beyond that:
If I was looking for a camera to be my primary, everyday, carry everywhere camera I'd go for the M6. Hands down. Newer, more versatile with the extra framelines and built in meter. In fact, in that case I'd go for a M6TTL, and get the extras that gives (But I would say that, wouldn't I!!!)
If on the other hand I was looking for a lovely camera to have as one of many, to be taken out when it was appropriate - I'd get the best DS M3 I could find. They are just so lovely to hold and use, and as well as being an appreciating asset, they are a real landmark in camera history.
Oh, and I second Denis' comments about buying anything pricy at a camera show, btw. Unless it's a dealer at the show who's prepared to warranty his sale.
have fun!
Steve Hoffman
Leicanutt
I had a minty M3; every time I took it out and it got a ding or brightmark I could hear Stephen Gandy's voice in my mind: "Every ding devalues the camera hundreds of dollars".
So, I got an M6 "classic" instead and use it every day; it works great, has a good meter and has the extra framelines I need. Wouldn't have it any other way..
So, I got an M6 "classic" instead and use it every day; it works great, has a good meter and has the extra framelines I need. Wouldn't have it any other way..
richard_l
Well-known
If I felt that I needed to have a meter always mounted on the M3's accessory shoe, then I would much prefer the M6 with its built-in meter. It makes for a neater, more compact unit if there is no meter sticking out waiting to get knocked off. Also, the built-in meter will be more accurate when filters are used, since it will meter through the filter. (Filter factors are not always dependable since they actually vary according to the scene and its lighting, particularly for contrast (colored) and polarizing filters.)
The M6 is one tough little workhorse. (Mine once got dropped 2 feet onto a hardwood floor without sustaining any damage, not even a rangefinder misalignment.) With a collapsible 50/2.8 Elmar, I've got a completely self-contained, relatively compact unit that goes with me everywhere.
I really feel that the M6 is your kind of camera, Frank.
Richard
The M6 is one tough little workhorse. (Mine once got dropped 2 feet onto a hardwood floor without sustaining any damage, not even a rangefinder misalignment.) With a collapsible 50/2.8 Elmar, I've got a completely self-contained, relatively compact unit that goes with me everywhere.
I really feel that the M6 is your kind of camera, Frank.
Richard
peter_n
Veteran
waileong
Well-known
M6 is not the same quality as an M3, although it's still very good. The M3 was built in a different era. Only the MP really lives up to its standards. If you can live with the knob rewind, and if you can live with the slow film loading, the M3 is a better camera. If you can't, do what I did-- get the M3 converted to M4 loading. Then you'll have an MP without the meter, which is not a bad idea at all.
Wai Leong
Wai Leong
R
RubenBlaedel
Guest
I have been shooting with a M6 since 1997 when I got it "new" as in a "shop demo" with a warranty. Some thing did not work probably on the lens so they gave the lens and camera an overhaul CLA etc. and it has been working great ever since. I have not had any problems with finder flare - but that is apperanly an issue. Sometimes I have used my father in laws M3 and it felt nice but with the meter on top a bit clumsy. I recently got a M2 - with the same framelines as the M6 ??? (or at least a wider frame line then the M3 50mm - do correct me if I am wrong) and I like that very much. I do have a leica meter MC and booster cell but I do not plan on using it all that much on the M2 though. Comparing the two cameras comes down to what I dislike. The M6 has some plastic on the film advance arm and the film loading is easier on the M2. I always carry a sep. lightmeter so I dont really need the one in the M6 but since the M6 was my first leica ( I had been dreaming of having a Leica for about 20 year when I finally got it) I will not part with it but enjoy using the two cameras together.
Like with good german cars you somtimes find second hand "hausfrauen" models with little milage and I guess an old M3 or M2 could work without problems for as long as film is still around so M6/M2/M3/MP - great cameras with access to great glass. I dont like the M6 ttl and M7 - even though they are just 2,4 mm larger they feel all wrong in my hands - but that is a nother story - cheers Ruben
Like with good german cars you somtimes find second hand "hausfrauen" models with little milage and I guess an old M3 or M2 could work without problems for as long as film is still around so M6/M2/M3/MP - great cameras with access to great glass. I dont like the M6 ttl and M7 - even though they are just 2,4 mm larger they feel all wrong in my hands - but that is a nother story - cheers Ruben
drec
Rangeflounder
I did have an M6 classic; I've got an M3 now. I'm not looking back.
1) Most important are the lenses you use. I absolutely love the 50; don't like the 35 one bit. M3 for me.
2) Do you really need the meter as opposed to a hand-held one? What irked me was that each time I wanted a reading before setting exposure and hyperfocusing, I had to lift the camera and point it at the sidewalk/my hand. I feel more natural just using a handheld meter. M3 for me.
3) How much slower is the knob rewind? 20 seconds? Whatever it is, if you want high speed, go get any automatic rewinding slr. This never bothered me. Same with loading. M6/M3; doesn't matter in this case.
4) The M3 shutter sounds 'cleaner' and is smoother in winding. People say brass vs. the newer steel gears. M3 for me.
5) Have to admit, it looks like one badass camera. Yeah, I'm an equipment masturbator. The M3 will be my last 35mm camera. Best regards
1) Most important are the lenses you use. I absolutely love the 50; don't like the 35 one bit. M3 for me.
2) Do you really need the meter as opposed to a hand-held one? What irked me was that each time I wanted a reading before setting exposure and hyperfocusing, I had to lift the camera and point it at the sidewalk/my hand. I feel more natural just using a handheld meter. M3 for me.
3) How much slower is the knob rewind? 20 seconds? Whatever it is, if you want high speed, go get any automatic rewinding slr. This never bothered me. Same with loading. M6/M3; doesn't matter in this case.
4) The M3 shutter sounds 'cleaner' and is smoother in winding. People say brass vs. the newer steel gears. M3 for me.
5) Have to admit, it looks like one badass camera. Yeah, I'm an equipment masturbator. The M3 will be my last 35mm camera. Best regards
denishr
アナログ侘・&#
Just wanted to share this with you...
I recently got an M6 Classic - only shot a few rolls so far - one color and a couple of B&W.
I noticed a funny thing - about half of my shots are incorrectly exposed, although the camera has a built-in meter
I rarely have incorrect exposures with the M2 or M3 - I rely on my trusty Weston V.
However, with the M6 it looks like I've been metering incorrectly - those LEDs and metering pattern are still something I have to get used to
I guess I'm really an "all-manual" guy, after all.
Denis
I recently got an M6 Classic - only shot a few rolls so far - one color and a couple of B&W.
I noticed a funny thing - about half of my shots are incorrectly exposed, although the camera has a built-in meter
I rarely have incorrect exposures with the M2 or M3 - I rely on my trusty Weston V.
However, with the M6 it looks like I've been metering incorrectly - those LEDs and metering pattern are still something I have to get used to
I guess I'm really an "all-manual" guy, after all.
Denis
The LEDs drive me crazy too. I have to figure out a way to stop fiddling with them to make them happy and to concentrate on my subject. I need to start carrying my meter with me all the time.
denishr
アナログ侘・&#
rover said:
Yeah, but that kind of beats the purpose of having a built-in meter, right?
I just need to get used to meter the scene first, set the exposure, and forget about the LEDs after that and shoot (until the light changes)...
Denis
It does, but the meter slows the process for me. I have to start setting it and then just letting it be. I think I am getting the hang of this photography thing and I am arguing with the meter a lot. I don't agree with the setting is suggest and fiddle around with it thinking I can do better. I guess I have to throw in a roll of slide film and challenge my meter to a duel.
T
Tim
Guest
I use slide film almost exclusively in the M6; basically once I got used to the meter pattern it's capable of choosing exposure better than I can. I can usually guess to within 1/2 - 1 stop - but while that's fine with negs it's not with slides. But you have to meter off different parts of the scene and work out what you want correctly exposed. If you are taking shots where you don't have the luxury of taking your time, then basically slide film is not much chop.....
I think the important thing with the built in meter is learning when to ignore it. If I am shooting b&w I tend to just meter generally then set exposure and ignore the led's, and trust in the film's latitude to cover minor innacuracies. Doesn't really work that way with Velvia though.
Comes down to what you want the camera for.
I think the important thing with the built in meter is learning when to ignore it. If I am shooting b&w I tend to just meter generally then set exposure and ignore the led's, and trust in the film's latitude to cover minor innacuracies. Doesn't really work that way with Velvia though.
Comes down to what you want the camera for.