M6 vs M3

M6 vs M3

  • M6

    Votes: 363 61.0%

  • M3

    Votes: 232 39.0%
  • Total voters
    595
kshapero said:
I use my 35mm lens on my M3 all the time. I just ignore the 50mm framelines and use the whole frame. No problem.
Click to expand...

Just curious, how practical is this? Do you use it only for distant or close up shots?

I love my M3 + 50 & 90, but sometimes wish to go a little wider. I've always thought it might be a pain to have to use another viewfinder.
 
M3 all the way. The M6 is good but it was built at a price point were
as the M3 was a no compromise design and build.

The only issue I have with the M3 is the lack of 35mm frame lines.

So I bought an M4-P to compliment it. 😉
 
ghostwriter69 said:
Just curious, how practical is this? Do you use it only for distant or close up shots?

I love my M3 + 50 & 90, but sometimes wish to go a little wider. I've always thought it might be a pain to have to use another viewfinder.
Click to expand...
Lately I am so in love with my Super Angulon 21/3.4 with VF that I haven't been using the 35mm. But when I did I used it for all kinds of shots.
 
I have both and I much prefer the higher magnification of the M3 and its less flare prone rangefinder. I shoot my 35 Biogon on it all the time too, no problem.
 
leicapixie said:
Keep the 2 M6.
i own a M3. Yes it was the pinnacle of construction. It has the best feel. It is OLD. The viewfinder can be erased by a bump! The balsa glue is very dry and fragile. i do prefer using my M3 to my M6. Yet the M6 offers metering, easier use of a wide angle.
Click to expand...

Still having three M2s, four M3s and two M4s, some being in use since the '60s. Four of these bodies have factory L signs on, i.e. not serviced yet, not needing service. BTW, used to have two M6s, both bought new, one is an .85 classical and the other one a .72 (which I sold in May), they too did not need any service for I was not using them at all (with the latter just four rolls because they flare) also they are not as smooth as an M3, some 30 years of their senior.

The M6 is an excellent camera however for those who can do with a hand meter (or sunny16) the classical Ms when found in good condition could be better and less expensive alternatives.

Just a few cents from an old hand..
 
hendriphile said:
This is news to me. Does the goggled 35mm lens in fact have "more moving parts" in the camera body's viewfinder/rangefinder assembly as compared with the non-goggled counterpart?
Click to expand...

putting a goggled lens on a camera does not change anything about how the camera works other than it is set to bring up the 50mm frame lines rather than the 35 (as I have stated in many other posts I love my goggled 35 and I could not be happier than having it on my M4-P)

as for the OP methinks that if you can afford two M6s saving for a voigtlander lens will take no time at all
 
To me this is a no-brainer. I'd go for the M6 (I have 2!) as that is the newer camera and certainly offers more versatility. I'm not going to get into this discussion about the M3 being better, more classic, blah..blah...Most of that is just a combo of myth and irrationality.

That last being said, I was in Fujiya this lunch and there I saw a black repainted M3 for just 103k yen. Cheap I thought. The paint-job wasn't too shabby either. But I don't really need another M body. (I got a Mamiya 7ii 50mm lens, instead).
 
If you like 50mm and 90mm focal lengths, the M3 is great. I also feel that the M3 is the better looking and feeling camera, but that's purely personal, you may feel the opposite.

If you shoot a lot, you may find loading a pain compared to the M6, but it's not that bad really.

Have a feel of an M3, if it does not grab you, might not be for you. For me, I liked it the instant I held one, very much my favourite Leica, compared to my previous MP and M6.
 
thegman said:
If you like 50mm and 90mm focal lengths, the M3 is great. I also feel that the M3 is the better looking and feeling camera, but that's purely personal, you may feel the opposite.

If you shoot a lot, you may find loading a pain compared to the M6, but it's not that bad really.

Have a feel of an M3, if it does not grab you, might not be for you. For me, I liked it the instant I held one, very much my favourite Leica, compared to my previous MP and M6.
Click to expand...

Ditto, I used to have 2 M6 then I sold one and bought a M3. Now I have a perfect combo, no GAS anymore. My M3 is with my 50/2 and sometimes 90/2 while M6 is welded with the 35/2. I have to say that I love both of them. The M3 feels more solid and heavier.

EDIT: by the way, I suggest you to follow this thread by dave lackey to know why people love their M3s
 
brokencivilian said:
Which would you choose and why? I currently have two M6's one classic one Ttl.85 and I was thinking of trading my classic for an m3 ....
Click to expand...

A couple of thoughts:

a) The shutter dial on the M3 and M6 classic are similar (small and go round anti-clockwise), whereas on the M6TTL the dial is large and goes clockwise (or is it the other way round?).

b) the M3 has a 0.91 viewfinder so by trading the classic with the 0.72 vf you would be left with two cameras with higher magnifications (0.85 + 0.91) which therefore may restrict your use of wider lenses.

It would seem to me that a combination of your M6 classic + M3 makes more sense than your M6TTL + M3.

Of course there may be other reasons to keep the M6TTL (newer, better condition, use of flash 😱 etc)

Personally, I had an M6TTL for a short while but found I preferred the M3.
 
I voted for the M6. Day in and day out it is great. I rarely use my M3 and find my time being spent between the M6 35mm lens with color film and my M2 with B&W film with either a 50mm or a 21mm SA. The film loading system in the M6 is night and day better then M2/3 which in my mind is huge.
 
Hi, at the beginning i´ve chosen eyes closed the m6.....but after several years and several cameras i can say now, i chose the m3.

The reasons are simple....

1-it doesn´t have any electronics.
2-I use mainly 50mm, 40mm and 21mm So the x91 VF Is great.
3-The m3 is prettier, doesn´t have that odd red dot in front of it...and the lever and vulcanite are far better than the ones of the m6.
3-The mr-4 lightmeter works great, i can set the exposure without looking through the VF just point and set. Perhaps bulkier but it has speeds coupled to it...the vc II is smaller but doesn´t have the speeds coupled.
4-for black and white you don´t need lightmeter
5-On troublesome weather it´s perfect...
6-The vf flares less than the m6´s...which flares just too much...

The cons of the m3 are:
1-Perhaps you won´t find a mint one...
2-Sometimes the VF-RF are exhausted...dim and no constrast...

On the contrary, if you like 35mm lens and ttl metering go for the m6....on the m6 you just never know the speeds youre using....but the best ttl metering leica is the m5....yes also the m7 but that has AE as well.

So...i was lucky to find a sample of the m3 which is as new as my m9....so got lucky i guess....

Have to recongize the m6 was a dream (came true) since i was 20...but now i´m happier with my m3....
 
After all the M3 talk around here I would like to try one but I shoot with 35mm lenses a lot of the time so M3 might not be a good choice for me. I loved my M6. - Jim
 
kshapero said:
Someone mentioned that for black and white film, you do not need a light meter. What does this mean?
Click to expand...

Maybe he means that it is easy enough to guess the exposure due to the wider lattitude in B&W film. Don't you think that this is what he mean?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom