Thinking of a LTM...

[Chemophilic]

Am I crazy?

I used to shoot with a M3 + collapsible summicron for awhile but sold it due to financial reasons.

Recently I got a Pentax 67 for very cheap... and crazy as it sounds, shooting that makes me miss the Leica a lot more. I know that I probably cannot afford a M by selling off the P67, but a LTM maybe?

For landscape I have a Hasseblad, but there is a documentary project I have been shooting that maybe I can finish with a LTM?

Yet when I think about trading off the huge negs from a P67 to a LTM, just not sure if that's a rational decision.

If you have any thoughts or experience with this, will really appreciate it!

 

[Pastor Chris]

I have had a few M3s and also LTM cameras. Both have a wonderful used experience, just different. No doubt that the user grade LTM camera and a nice Summitar would be much cheaper than an M3 and Summicron. What puzzles me a bit is that you seem concerned about the difference in negative size. It seems like you are asking that question more so than what camera to get. If the project would benefit in its ethos somehow by using a vintage Leica, then it seem like an easy decision. If you just want a compact 35mm camera to use then there are probably many other choices that would be much cheaper. Maybe you could expand your thoughts a bit for us. I am curious to know.

 

[Chemophilic]

Thanks Chris! I think I do enjoy using the rangefinder more than a SLR type like the P67. If I want to shoot street portraits, then the Hassy will be more than enough. And thus when I weigh between a LTM and the P67, the pro will be a lighter camera and possible lens expansion (thus not a fixed lens RF), and the con will be the neg size.

Moreover, that particular project is about documenting an old district in Hong Kong so maybe vintage lenses may add to that (stretching it I know...)

 

[Pastor Chris]

Stretching it! Any reason for another camera (LOL). I have seen some interesting things with old lenses, especially those that are a bit scuffed and worn. The LTM cameras are delightfully tiny, especially with say a 5cm Elmar; very pocketable and a nice complement to a TLR I would think. I like to hunt around on ebay for LTM "found" cameras that have poor descriptions, fuzzy photos, found and sold by someone who doesn't know how to describe what they have or test it's function. Buyers are often wary of such cameras, but I have bought about three of them over the last few years for $150-$175. All have been gems with a little TLC. Worth the time to look if you are not in a big rush. Also, As I have moved on from these, you clean them up, replace the covers, take good photos and make accurate descriptions and flip them on Ebay for a profit. Never been burned. It will interesting to see what others say on this thread. Thanks for posting.

 

[tunalegs]

You can find Canon LTM cameras for relatively cheap. Canon Ps sell for $200 and less, regularly on that one auction site. Lever wind and a large viewfinder make them a bit less of a hassle to use than the typical screw mount leica clones. Canon 7s sell for a bit more.

 

[Spicy]

You should send an email to Youxin and ask him about an LTM Canon. Their fit and finish is really only barely behind the LTM Leicas, and in most cases it's more a question of how it has been treated.

But if you do ask him, you should look into getting either a IIIx or a Canon CLA'd and having a Japanese beamsplitter put in -- I got him to put one in to my IIIc when I got it CLA'd last year, and it's simply amazing. Very high contrast...

 

[Bingley]

I agree about Canon RFs. They're very robust and in most instances cheaper than Barnack Leicas (although a good user grade Leica IIIc is not all that expensive). In addition to the Canon P and 7, the Canon bottom loaders are also worth considering, particularly the later models with improved viewfinders.

Finally, I'd also consider the original Voigtlander Bessa R, if you can find one in good condition. The R has the brightest vf of any LTM camera, a reliable meter, is fully manual, and is easy to load. It's not as solid as a Barnack or a Canon P, but it also weighs less which is an advantage if you're carrying the camera around all day. It's a brilliant design.

 

[Chemophilic]

Thanks for all the suggestions! It seems that the later Canon LTM (such as the IV?) has the vf/rf in the same window in contrast to the separate vf/rf in the iiic for example. How much difference does it make... is it a love/hate sort of thing or it just takes practice?

 

[tunalegs]

Thanks for all the suggestions! It seems that the later Canon LTM (such as the IV?) has the vf/rf in the same window in contrast to the separate vf/rf in the iiic for example. How much difference does it make... is it a love/hate sort of thing or it just takes practice?

I frankly find the seperate RF window of older RF cameras a bit of an annoyance. I personally prefer having the RF in the viewfinder. It's probably going to depend on what you prefer the most.

 

[Vickko]

Biggest difference (and PITA) is the double viewing of the Leica LTM's for framing and focusing.

And also your concern with shooting MF, and then seeing the postage stamp size 35mm negatives. The quality isn't there, comparing MF to 35mm.

Is it the size and handling of the LTMs that you miss?

Can I interest you in the Fuji 690 cameras (GSW690II/III, GW690II/III), for Leica-like handling although "Big" body ? But consider, small for LF !!!

 

[yek]

Leica III is a very good camera. It is very small. When mounted with a collapsible lens, it is easy to be put in a pocket. The separated VF/RF is not a big issue to me, but its built-in VF is fixed for 50 mm lens. An external VF somewhat negates the benefit of compactness. And film-loading is a little troublesome. They are very old, so make sure to find one in good working condition.

TLR is very quiet. And it uses 120 films as your Hasselblad. It's good for street documentary too. Would you also give it a consideration?

 

[splitimageview]

Separate VF and RF is a non issue considering what you also get: a 1.5x magnified view (I.e. more accurate) and diopter adjust.

 

[Chemophilic]

Thanks for all the suggestions! I think I do miss the small form factor for a rangefinder being quick and quiet. A TLR won't be a bad choice too...

Lots to think about! Too bad its rare to see a LTM in person and find out if the vf/rf is going to be an obstacle. Did it take you long to get used to it? Thanks!

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

I'd be very cautious of an elderly screw thread Leica for serious work. They are fun to use, you get to chat with a lot of people and so on but they have a lot of limitations and irritations in everyday use. The technique is different and you end up muttering routines as a sort of mantra to get things right. OK, so you can get used to it all but even then I'd only recommend it as a hobby or bit of fun now and then...

Also, getting one with a seriously good lens on it is going to be either time consuming or else expensive. And there's questions of back up and finding some one to service it. As a hobby I don't mind sending them off and waiting weeks for their return but you might not.

I hope this doesn't put you off but I do think you ought to go into it with your eyes open. The early ones are a lot different from the M series and a lot of early lenses have what's politely called character but I often think otherwise. So, do it for fun but don't sell your present equipment to fund it because you'll probably need it sooner or later.

Regards, David

 

[Roger Hicks]

From 1969 to 1974 or so, a IIIa was my 'everyday' camera. Then I got an M3. Thereafter, the IIIa saw very little use. A lot depends on whether you want cameras to play with, or to take pictures with. If size is important, remember too that collapsible lenses can be used on film Ms.

At the risk of eliciting howls of rage from Canon owners, I wouldn't bother with any Canon RF (and yes, I tried several in my 20s and 30s). They just don't feel as nice as Leicas.

Cheers,

R.

 

[goamules]

On the above "...don't feel as nice as leicas..." I disagree. Not a howl, but a dissent; I find the Canon barnack style cameras just as good if not better than Leica's.

Canon's finish is robust (many Leica IIIcs have flaking chrome), they seldom wear through (many leicas show brassing), their curtains are more robust (I've had 6 Cannons with perfect shutters, but my one IIIc had horrible curtains). The cannon center bodies are a solid piece, so you never need to recover them (many Leicas need recovering). The machining, precision, and other aspects that form the intangible "feel" are all top quality.

The single viewfinder that has 3 magnification levels obviates the need for external viewfinders.

While people fiddle, CLA, recurtain, recover, and deal with light leaks on old Leicas, I happily shoot my off the shelf Canon IVs....never had to work on any of them. If that doesn't say something about quality, it just "feels" nice.

 

[mike rosenlof]

I use a Canon P. Works well for me. Unlike many others, I'm a little less than thrilled with its viewfinder. It's probably because I'm left-eyed so I have to fit my face behind the camera. I find the 35mm framelines not very usable and the 50 kind of so-so. I bought a shoe mounted viewfinder for the 35.

I think for the full LTM experience, you need a Barnack Leica. Once the lens is screwed on, the "P" feels pretty much like an M-mount rangefinder, or a fixed lens. Pretty much.

And back to the OP. Unless the Pentax 6x7 is somehow not workable for your documentary project, stick with it. It sounds like it works, and you know it's working. The 50+ year old camera you pick up might not be entirely ready to go.

 

[sanmich]

The problem with Barnacks is:

1- by the time you get one CLA'd, with a new beamsplitter and curtains, and after you realize that an external finder is so nice to have, it's not that cheap anymore.

2- the range of available modern lenses is very limited and often expensive.

3- The winding and reloading are significantly slower.

The good thing is their size, and, oh boy are they nice to handle and shoot if you aren't in a rush 🙂

 

[Livesteamer]

Ltm Leicas are not for everyone. I would strongly suggest you try to look at a few or better yet, borrow one and put a roll thru it. As a much younger fellow I considered a IIIc ($49 at Wall st. camera in 1970.) but went for a Nikormat instead. Now at age 56, with other cameras when needed, I mostly use a pair of IIIc's because they fit in my pocket and so are with me and I enjoy them. My user IIIc I bought from the original owner and I have never serviced it, works well. My IIIc stepper came from e bay in petrified condition and required service and a new cover. Both are wonderful for me but then I'm mostly a 50mm person and I'm OK with the finder. Good Luck, Joe

 

[sanmich]

Too bad its rare to see a LTM in person and find out if the vf/rf is going to be an obstacle. Did it take you long to get used to it? Thanks!

If you shoot with an external VF, it's a non issue, and the VF will give you what only the M3 can give you: bright clear 1:1 viewing.
[edit]: what I mean is that with an external VF, the choice of which camera has less impact on the ease of use of the VF.[/edit]

If you don't, I would prefer the barnacks with close RF/VF (IIIb and later). Much quicker to shift from a window to the next one.
In case you do intend to use the camera VF, I believe you should choose a lens as small as possible since the VF blockage can be significant.