Leica LTM What is a good LTM as a "user" - easy?

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
Another thought regarding Leitz lenses...


Uncoated lenses will give you that "authentic look", but not all pre-WW II Leitz lenses found today are uncoated; I have a couple of pre-War black 90/ 135 Elmars and a black Hektor that were sent-back to Leitz to have their glass coated. I also have a coated Summar.

If you get uncoated lenses ( or the lenses have scratches/cleaning-marks ), it would be a good idea to have a lens-hood to prevent flare (when you aren't using flare for an artisitic effect).

I have a Heavy-star cast hood for the 90/135 lenses and the Leitz "barn-door" for the Summicron (which clamps nicely to the Leitz 36mm clamp-on to 39mm filter adapter).

Good luck !

Luddite Frank
 
I'm narrowing it down now, thanks to your help and suggestions.

However, it has opened up some new questions:

Are IIIc to IIIf conversions to be avoided? (The flash "hole" was, in two examples properly done.) Why?

Prices: (Partly inflated because I am looking at Euro priced cameras) I am finding condition B+ to B- IIIc and IIIf, including clean lenses (3.5 adn 2.0 50s), in the $700-950 range.) These are dealers throughout Europe with good reputations and these are really clean cameras.)
 
Here's another nod to the IIIC. I find it easy to use, a pleasure to the hand and solid enough that I don't fret about carrying it everywhere. A flash port might be nice but learning what you can do without one is good for your photography, IMO, and forces you to see with your minds' eye while working.

Cheers
 
I'd say III-IIIc as later cameras start getting expensive. I possess a plain III with a Summar which certainly does give that erm slightly cloudy look. I just love it to pieces, and it has that certain something which other makes don't.

For something a bit left field, there's always a Bessa L which has no RF, or viewfinder, but is cheap as chips and has a meter built in.

Andy
 
I'd vote for a IIIc or maybe a IIf.

Neither expensive but I would agree with all those who have advised that a CLA should be very much in the picture.

The 'look' belongs to the Summar.

Michael
 
The IIIc gets my vote also. I have mine vor about 6 month and it's handy and it's sturdy. I managed to drop it on a sidwalk as i did not close my laptopcase. Except a small scratch no problem at all.
The RF is a bit tricky as German Cameras from that era tend to have low contrast RF's ( be it a Retina II or a Certo Dollina).
It's a bit easier if you use the Leica Made okaro orange filter or if you make it your self out of orange transparent foil). It seems to me as if the RF was meant to bean additional help and not the most important feature of the camera.
A well tended IIIc will reward you with a great feeling and interesting handling.
A Canon IV will be heavier, very well made.Also the RF has more contrast than the Leica IIIc (at least my specimen) but it's RF/VF is a bit on the darker side.
A Bessa R + an old Leica lens woulöb be rather tempting when it comes to comfort, but It sound as if you want to get the Leica feel besides the Leica look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom