Underwhelmed by the M3

Rangefinder cameras are certainly not for everyone but I actually enjoy working with them and find them to be very responsive for me. In truth it really doesn't matter to me whether I am using a Leica III, an M3, an M-A, a ZI or the Bessa R. For my use they are all terrific cameras and very easy for me to use.

But for some it almost seems to be some sort of religion. To be honest it really doesn't matter which type of camera you enjoy working with as long as you are using it. Like everything everything else, the more you use it, the better you get at using it, and oftentimes the more a certain type of camera will begin to appeal to you. Just buying one and trying it out for a week or two will not be enough to help you push through that unfamiliarity you feel, particularly if you naturally favor a different mechanism.

But really, why bother. If you really enjoy working with a TLR or an SLR, life is probably too short to worry about becoming fond of working with another style of camera. Your best exposures will almost always come from the camera that you are most comfortable with.
 
There is something about the smoothness of stuff build in that style/era. I've only owned the later M4-P and M6 versions which I thought I loved, but then came the Nikon S2. Everything just clicked (pun intended) for me. It just felt like an extension of my hand/fingers.

I purchased my first SLR as the OM system was just starting out, I went Nikkormat. Years later I purchased an OM-1 and a couple of lenses and found it a lot of fun, but it didn't have the same feeling that I get from my Nikkormat or F2 plain prism.

Oddly enough my Bessa L / CV 25 Snap-Shot combo felt like an extension of me too. New metal lens, pretty much plastic body, but it just felt right. My T was fun, but not the same.

I've used lots of different cameras over the years, but only a few provide me with the feedback that I can only describe as being a part of me. It's completely subjective, perhaps I need to up the meds again, but that's me.

People are attune to different things. Feelings that they can describe and understand, rumblings from inside they can't identify, and sometimes don't want to. Others aren't sensing those wave lengths. Nothing wrong with either side of the continuum long as they respect the other.

B2 (;->
 
Erik van Straten said:
Most people use cameras to "search" a picture by looking through the viewfinder. However, the Leica M3 is a camera that "takes" the picture once you've found it by looking through your eyes.

Erik.
Click to expand...

Yes. When I look at a scene, my brain puts a frame around it. Usually a 35mm frame, but it could be 28, 50, 75, or 90. Or even a 24mm.
 
The M3 is a good camera, but not every good camera is right for every person. I prefer the M4-2 in the Leica M line, for various reasons. But it really doesn't matter much at all. Use what inspires you to make photographs that satisfy you.
 
The best film rangefinder that Leica ever made was probably the M5 which failed largely because it wasn't an M3. In many ways the M3 held Leica back.
 
Huss said:
The difference is that with the M3 you can set the self timer, throw the camera up in the air, and by the time it comes down (and you catch it..) it will have taken an incredible decisive moment pulitzer price worthy photo.
Try this with any other camera, and the best you'd get is a cat picture.
Click to expand...

You got it!

I bought my first M2 and them M3 in 1968 when I started working as a PJ in college. At that time the pro choices were Nikon RF and SLR and Leica. I didn't like the lens mount of the Nikon RFs and hated the finger wheel so I bought Leicas and soon after a Nikon F.

Today I still do similar work and because of familiarity I still use 4 M bodies. I carry M2, M3 SS for my 90 f2, MP with Leicavit and M4P. My reason for the M3 is focusing the 90 f2 at max aperture is easier with the higher magnification RF and the 90 frame is much easier to compose in. I prefer my MP x.85 for my 75 summilux and M2 and M4P for 21-50mm.

I've shot M's so long I know them like the back of my hand and see no reason to change. I'm the same way about my F and F2.

I agree Leica is a religion for some just because of the name and a lot of folks have convinced themselves there's a superiority to Leica. My response to that has always been, if there's a true superiority to Leica ( or fill in the blank __) for those of us that make a living with photography, we would use nothing but Leica (or _ fill in the blank________).

I bought an R2 just to see how I liked it and I thought it was a great camera. The RF base is a bit short for accurate long fast glass I felt but it was a very nice camera.
 
Keith said:
The best film rangefinder that Leica ever made was probably the M5 which failed largely because it wasn't an M3. In many ways the M3 held Leica back.
Click to expand...

Beethoven would have said "The M3 brings melodies to my head"!

:D
 
As others have noted, you’ll probably struggle to find a truly epiphanic answer because much of it has to do with personal preference; akin to asking why someone likes red more than green and such.

I’ve have the similar M2-R, and I have absolutely no desire for any other camera. Before the M2, I used a Bessa R2M and then a Leica iiif. I initially alternated between the Bessa and Barnack, but I naturally began to gravitate towards the Leica, and that was it.

The M2 followed, slightly edging out the iiif, although I will still keep both the Bessa and Barnack around.

And the reason largely centers on tactility: the buttery smooth operation, to which you yourself noted, and even the weight. If I wanted lighter, I’d go back to the iiif, which is also superb in regards to ergonomics…unless, of course, it’s not…it’s personal preference.

I simply enjoy using the M2 more than any other camera, and the whole photographic process is important to me, not just getting the shot.

As for modern technical amenities, I was pretty much using my Canon 350D DSLR as an archaic contraption (manual focus only lens, single shot, manual exposure, etc) before completely shifting over to film.

The Bessa is a great camera, one that I would highly recommend, but the ‘feel’ of the M2 remains unsurpassed for me, maybe not for others…

Oh, and the M2, not M3, is the “best camera in the world.”
 
After a series of LTM cameras from the IIf, IIIf, IIIg, Canon 7s, and Bessa R, I finally graduated to a Leica M7. Of the LTM cameras, I'd say that the Bessa R is the easiest to use with its built in meter, and excellent viewfinder.

The one thing that I like best about the M7 and M5 are their decent sized shutter speed dials. (I've not tried the M6TTL, but it's similar to the M7 in shutter dial size). In the meantime, I got the M2, M3, M4-2. All of these have tiny, unusable shutter speed dials. True, the iIIf and IIIg also have small shutter speed dials, but since you need to lift them up to change speeds anyway, it's not a problem. Only when you put the Leicameter on these cameras do they make ergonomic sense. Then you have the big overhanging shutter speed dial similar to the M5. To me, this is the fatal flaw of the MP and classic M6. They have no way around the atrophic shutter speed dial.

Initially, I was underwhelmed by the M2 and M3. However, their solidity and quiet elegance have started to win me over. I like the rewind knob better than the crank on the M7 and others. At least they don't roll back when your hand slips off.

I also appreciate that the M2 and M3 have self timers. Those that don't have them are really annoying when you want that feature. I have an Autoknips spring wound self timer for the M7 and M4-2. It's fiddly to use, but it works.

So, of the Leica M cameras, my personal ranking for use is M7, M5 and M4-2 with Leicameter MR-4.

Having said that, I feel that Leica is a huge money pit. For the price of Leica gear, you can (and I did) buy medium format gear. Rolleiflex 3.5F, 2.8F, Voigtlander Bessa IIIW and the Fuji 667 folder. Even the Voigtlander Bessa RF and Kodak Medalist II 6x9 format cameras. Leica lenses are superb. However, on a 24x36mm piece of film, there's only so much you can do. These medium format cameras with their also excellent lenses can really put out an image with smooth tonality and tons of detail.

So, this is my long and rambling way of saying that you've tried the M3 and it isn't for you. It's not the end of the world. There are many other cameras out there for you to try. Every camera has some quirk that you have to either learn to live with, or give it up.

As they say in fishing, catch and release.
 
Leicas aren't money pits as they don't depreciate. Just don't drop them or pay too much in the first place. ;)

I had an M3 at 18 and it was a great camera, I really enjoyed it. That was a few decades ago. They *still* are great cameras, but as someone mentioned above, I view them now from an historical perspective moreso than from a user perspective. The exquisite engineering and manufacturing that went into these cameras is unmatched. I've had many more Ms, pretty much all models multiple times, since then. I have many Leicas now, but I prefer the Barnacks, although I do still have an M2.

There are just too many great cameras that were manufactured since the M3 debuted in 1954 that have superior usability features, like built-in meters, quick loading, auto exposure, etc.

I still use old cameras, don't get me wrong, I have lots of them. But they are almost always used when I specifically want to go on a photo junket with an old camera.

For regular life, I use a more modern film camera, usually a Contax 159 or an N1, or digital.
 
Perhaps "money pit" isn't the best way to put it. But, Leica film cameras are expensive, and they are still only for 35mm film.
These days, that same money can buy you an excellent medium format camera.
 
It did take a few rolls to warm up to the M3, at first I found it inferior to the Bessa as well - heavy, lacking ergonomic grip, no meter. Now, I wouldn't even consider buying another Bessa, with it's crappy finder that always goes out of sync, that tiny rangefinder patch and lack of balance due to the low weight body and erroneous placement of strap lugs.
The shutter dial is my biggest issue with the M3, but I've learned to set the shutter speed in advance, so it becomes a non issue.
Bottom loading is a feature: with this you always get the same place for your frames, if you want to change film mid-roll; and it has a 100% success rate, no more rewinding and finding out that the film was never wound up.
The OM1 can compete with the M3, but the lack of mirror is like having a 1-2 stop IBIS in comparison - valuable with the low ISO of film.

I have two M3 currently, and they would probably be the last cameras I'd liquidate in a crisis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom