roundg
Well-known
If u already have a M4, then I suggest a M4-P. Same in operattion and cheaper....
Second M Body Suggestions
- Thread starter Rafael
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 44
- Views 3K
back alley
IMAGES
any closer to a decision rafael?
Rafael
Mandlerian
Actually, I think I am. This thread has been very helpful for me so far. I had not been giving much thought at all to the M3 because the viewfinder only works for 50mm and longer lenses. But in answer to Roland's question, I probably want the second body more for the ability to have two different lenses mounted than to have two different films loaded. The most likely lens combinations for me would be 28 + 50, 35 + 50, 35 + 90, or 50 + 90. All of those combinations would work well with an M4 + M3 set-up. So the more I think about it, the more I think that the M3 might actually be the best option for me. The problem is that I have never handled one or had the chance to look through the 0.91 viewfinder. I also have no personal experience with loading film into an M3. So we'll see. But at this stage, I think that I am leaning towards choosing between an M3 and an M4.
back alley
IMAGES
sounds good.
i liked the m3, but didn't want to have to load film in it on the quick.
base plates and all.
call me lazy but i like a swing door.
i liked the m3, but didn't want to have to load film in it on the quick.
base plates and all.
call me lazy but i like a swing door.
Rafael
Mandlerian
I couldn't remember whether you had an M3 or an M2. So how difficult is it to load the film really?
3js
Established
Sorry, not meaning to interrupt, but I have a M2 and a M4, and the loading of a M2 is little slower, but very positive, since the take up spool hold everything you put in there, which is not always the case with M4... No Z for M2🙂 It takes normally around 1 minute to reload in a "field" conditions, rewinding not counting. So it´s not that difficult, it just take little more time.Rafael said:
Btw, I just bought a Minolta CLE, which has a very good built in 28 finder. But it´s electric...
richard_l
Well-known
The builds of the M3 and M2 are equally solid, but the average M3 is probably in better condition than the M2. The M2 was more popular among professional photographers because of the 35mm framelines, so many of them have been overused. The fact that the M2 was cheaper than the M3 had to do with features, not build. For Leica at that time in history, 'economy model' had nothing to do with sacrificing quality.terrafirmanada said:
It is tempting to generalize from a single example to an entire category, but it is statistically invalid.
Richard
W
Way
Guest
Not a Leica but what about the Zeiss Ikon? 28-35-50-85 framelines, so I approximate when I use my 90 cron and that works well. Nice large and bright vf, very easy to focus, crisp shuter release. Pretty easy to load with the swing door.
Kim Coxon
Moderator
My vote would be for another M4 but then I may have a certain bias. 😀 😀 😀
Kim
Kim
Rafael
Mandlerian
Kim Coxon said:
Oh, I've been back to look at the ad more than once!
Xmas
Veteran
Rafael
A M4-2 user is cheaper than most other options, if it has been used, it should have had any early bugs ironed out. It is cheaper because no one else seems to consider, the cinderilla...
If you dont wear specs you can open both eyes and use the outer view as an approx to 28mm, as some people do, more difficult with eye glasses, contacts?
But if you dont use 135mm an M2 is as good and it may be cheaper in maintenance, although parts are not always available.
Noel
A M4-2 user is cheaper than most other options, if it has been used, it should have had any early bugs ironed out. It is cheaper because no one else seems to consider, the cinderilla...
If you dont wear specs you can open both eyes and use the outer view as an approx to 28mm, as some people do, more difficult with eye glasses, contacts?
But if you dont use 135mm an M2 is as good and it may be cheaper in maintenance, although parts are not always available.
Noel
Bill58
Native Texan
"For the last 13 months I've only used a Kiev (or Contax)........."
Noel:
I'm curious about what you think about the Kiev as a user.
Bill
Noel:
I'm curious about what you think about the Kiev as a user.
Bill
peter_n
Veteran
I used the same rationale Rafael. I have a 0.72 M (lenses =< 35mm) and a 0.85mag M (lenses => 50mm). I just got a 1.25x magnifier for the 0.85 as I have an f2 90mm lens and focus has to be spot on, so effectively I have a 0.72 and a 1.06. I usually have the same film in both bodies but the differences in magnification work really well for my lens kit.Rafael said:
Xmas
Veteran
Bill
We are stealing some one elses thread.
If you drop a Kiev is is not a collectors piece, i.e. >>$s, my leica kit would be expensive to replace e.g. black M2, leiciavit and lux(s). If I go to a wedding I take a Leica.
The optical performance is better or comparable with my 60-70 leitz e.g. lux performance! I tend to work in high contrast situations. The reliability of a Kiev which has seen a hard life and Ru maintenance can be terrible but they are easy to screwdriver.
The kiev is slow (in working) compared with a LTM and terrible compared with a M. If you want a shooter a Fed 1 or Zorki 1 and a 5cm or 35mm is difficult to beat, but maintenance will be $ or unless to do it yourself, or buy another body each time.
Noel
We are stealing some one elses thread.
If you drop a Kiev is is not a collectors piece, i.e. >>$s, my leica kit would be expensive to replace e.g. black M2, leiciavit and lux(s). If I go to a wedding I take a Leica.
The optical performance is better or comparable with my 60-70 leitz e.g. lux performance! I tend to work in high contrast situations. The reliability of a Kiev which has seen a hard life and Ru maintenance can be terrible but they are easy to screwdriver.
The kiev is slow (in working) compared with a LTM and terrible compared with a M. If you want a shooter a Fed 1 or Zorki 1 and a 5cm or 35mm is difficult to beat, but maintenance will be $ or unless to do it yourself, or buy another body each time.
Noel
Rafael
Mandlerian
peter_n said:
It's starting to make a lot of sense to me too.
Rafael
Mandlerian
ferider said:
Is that mostly because of the viewfinder magnification or do you have other reasons for prefering the M3?
AusDLK
Famous Photographer
Easy.
Hexar RF.
Great camera. In some ways better than the M7. And inexpensive if you look around. I paid ~net $300-400 for mine after some wheeling and dealing.
Hexar RF.
Great camera. In some ways better than the M7. And inexpensive if you look around. I paid ~net $300-400 for mine after some wheeling and dealing.
Xmas
Veteran
If you go for a M2 or M3 you may want the quick load option which makes them (almost) like the M4 and later, in laoding otherwise you have to play (juggle with) with a loose spool.
Apart from age and build quality, spares (none) the M2 and M3 have the in finder depth of field notch 'cues' which no one seems to use. HCB certaintly did not use.
Apart from age and build quality, spares (none) the M2 and M3 have the in finder depth of field notch 'cues' which no one seems to use. HCB certaintly did not use.
Rafael
Mandlerian
Thanks Roland. I really appreciate your opinions.
peter_n
Veteran
Absolutely best for you to try them out. All of this is anecdotal.
