Trade M3 for M4?

as said above, thanks to additional framelines, M4 is more versatile.
BUT, if you prefer 50mm lenses, M3 is unbeatable.
Versatility vs specialisation.
 
chuckroast said:
As originally built, yes. But it is often possible to adjust the M3 to get down to 0.7meter. In involves some kind of fiddling with the focusing cam system - i.e. a tech has to do it. My understanding is that not all M3s can be thus adjusted.
Click to expand...
I also think even with adjustment not all RFs will all get down to 0.7m. Pretty sure mine (SN 1.1 million) stops around .75 or .8 though of course the lens will focus as close as it will focus.
 
I've had two M3s, an M2, a M4-2, and two M4s. I don't have a favorite, and wouldn't switch from one to the other unless I was sure I could make some money at it. I mostly don't use 35mm and would rather have the larger focus magnification of the M3, IF the finder is in good condition.
 
I've been finding that I much prefer the knob rewind of the M3 to the crank rewinds I've used on non-Leica cameras. If your finger slips mid-rewind, it doesn't loosen the tension on the reel. I've also found the old style bottom loading to not be a big deal to get used to. I had initially planned on getting my M3 take-up reel upgraded to the quick load system but now I have no such plans.

The deciding factor really ought to come down to how much you use the 35mm focal length. If your main lens is a 35mm, get the M4 or any other M. If your main lens is a 50mm or you regularly need to focus fast 90mm or 135mm lenses, keep the M3.

Your options for framing a 35mm lens with an M3 are thus:
1. You buy a special Leica 35mm lens with goggles
2. You use an external viewfinder
3. You approximate framing in the viewfinder, which I hear is more accurate for 40mm lens framing, and live with the extra elements in your frame
4. You have a technician swap the viewfinder for one of a lower magnification with 35mm frame lines from another M body

All of these seem suboptimal to me. If I ever buy a 35mm lens, I'll probably get one for one of my SLRs. I don't shoot with that focal length often anymore and I'm not giving up my M3, as my copy holds sentimental value to me.
 
The M6 with the .85 finder is almost as good as the M3, and has 35mm frame lines.
But that would cost a whole bunch more than the M4...
Joe
 
M3 I had was finest M I ever had.
I have sold it because I just didn't used it.
SBOII offers real 1:1 for 50mm, M3 does not.
 
I like them all. As others have said, it really comes down whether you need 35mm framelines, though a goggled 35 (I have a Summaron) works well (and I think it looks really good on the M3 -- the Leica from the Borg Collective).

Having the rewind crank on the M4 is very handy, though as rewind knobs go, the knob on the M3 and M2 is pretty good. It does take a while, though, if you're kind of in a hurry.
 
The M3 deserves fame as the first M camera, but its a miserable awkward camera to shoot with
compared with the M4 with its faster more convenient loading, faster more comfortable film advance, easier rewind and 35mm frameline.

M3 hero worship often comes from owners who never, if ever, shot anything else.
Sure the M3 is a great design for 1953, but the later film M's passed it by.
I personally hate using the film knob rewinds of the M3, M2, M1 and modern MP.
Yep, literally hate.
 
Last edited:
I was between the two cameras earlier this month and had been looking at bodies for about 2 months. Both the M4 and M3 can be found for around $1500.

As others have stated, it’s worth a change if you plan to use a 35mm lens. I like the larger magnification of the M3 finder and shoot 50 mostly. It’s a little more fiddly with the rewind knob and loading spool, but they’re small niggles in the grand scheme of things. And an accessory crank can be found for les than the hassle of swapping cameras.
 
CameraQuest said:
I personally hate using the film knob rewinds of the M3, M2, M1 and modern MP.
Yep, literally hate.
Click to expand...
...am I right in saying you're a fan of the Contax? Both pre-war and post-war Contaxes have almost the worst rewind I've ever seen (the absolute worst goes to the weird serrated wheel on the FED 4). At least the Leica's rewind pulls up so you can get a good purchase on it.

I always thought the canted rewind on the M4 and M6 was a kludge. Leotax's fold-out clutched lever on the later models was much nicer to use - and it looked better, too. Don't know why Leica didn't "borrow" that design...
 
I think it depends entirely on your preferred focal length. The M3 VF is hard to beat for a 50mm lens, maybe the M7 or MP with 0.85x VF magnification come close. If you prefer 35 mm focal length then the M4 is the better choice. Different film loading and rewind designs are completely irrelevant, IMO.
 
The M3 has the most precise focusing of all the M-Leicas because the viewfinder enlarges the view 0.9x. The other M´s 0.7x. If you use fast lenses like the Noctiluxes or 50mm Summiluxes the M3 is the best choice because the M3 focuses more precise. The rangefinder of the M3 is the best of all Leicas.

Another advantage of the M3 is the precision of the framelines for the 50mm lenses. If you want to use the full frame for your enlargements, the M3 is the best choice.
 
Last edited:
rfaspen said:
I'm not sure I understand this discussion. Obviously you want.....no, I mean you NEED both. Why are we talking this way?

How many of us have an M3, and an M2, and an M......so on..... ?
And then the digital Ms?

Should I be ashamed? 😬
Click to expand...
I like the cut of your jib...
 
Horatio said:
Just curious whether anyone here has gone from an M3 to M4, and what was the motivation? I have a decent, user-grade M3 I'm considering offering in trade towards an M4. Other than the improved film loading and rewind knob, is it worth the bother? The M4 is priced at $1500. How much should I expect to pay?
Click to expand...
I have both, and the motivation was, well because both are awesome, and you should have both too. But if you can only have one, and you are considering trading your M3 you should test the M4 if you can. Test the eye relief and backlight flare resistance of the finder to see if it suits you. Look closely at the rangefinder for signs of degradation. Shoot a roll at all speeds and look at the negs. Was there shutter capping at high speeds? How is the negative spacing? Is there a subtle light leak in the upper part of the frame? Sometimes light leaks due to deteriorating light shields present at slower shutter speeds. If the M4 passes all these tests, then you should probably find a way to buy it AND keep your M3 :)
 
I have an M3 (single stroke), an M6, and had an M2 and an M4-2. I like the precise focusing of the M3. I also use 40mm lenses a lot and the M3 is perfect for that focal length (using the entire vf to frame). For wider focal lengths, I use an external vf... just like I do on a Contax IIa. The M3 is a classic for a reason and an excellent and practical shooter. I've never had an interest in the M4, although if you're mainly a 35mm shooter I can see the attraction (but the M2 is better for that focal length IMO).
 
As others have already mentioned, the M4 has 35mm frame lines. But... for my taste, the 35mm lines are just a tad too close to the edge of the frame and I miss the generous context that the 50mm lines on the M4 give. In fact, the 35mm lines are so close to the edge, that I'd take the statement that you can shoot a 28 using the entire frame with a grain of salt..
 
pvdhaar said:
As others have already mentioned, the M4 has 35mm frame lines. But... for my taste, the 35mm lines are just a tad too close to the edge of the frame and I miss the generous context that the 50mm lines on the M4 give. In fact, the 35mm lines are so close to the edge, that I'd take the statement that you can shoot a 28 using the entire frame with a grain of salt..
Click to expand...

Interesting. I feel the opposite and don’t care for the framelines of the 50 on a.72x finder.

I guess the best response is to get hands on one and see if it’s what you expected.
 
I have owned an M3 for almost twenty years. The debate over the updated film winding and 35mm frame lines have raged through my mind also. I am no longer bothered by the antiquated rewind or the lack of the wider frame lines. I use a Jupiter 35mm lens anyway. The edge to edge width of the entire ranger finder is about thirty five mm. Just be careful of details on the edge of the rangefinder!
 
Add a viewfinder magnifier to a 0.72x magnification M-body, and presto, you get all the benefits of the greater mag of the M3 (or even more mag than the M3), and can have crank rewind and easier loading too.

A 1.4x from LLL will provide life-size viewing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom