what to buy, m2 or m3 ?

T

trimix

Newbie
Local time
11:46 PM
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
2
a friend's father wishes to sell his pristine m2 number 1112668 and m3 number 1002296. so far i have only used nikon f3, but wish to start on rangefinders. i wish to carry the camera with me wherever i go. can someone give me a hint, as to which camera to buy off him ? which lens should i buy for it ? many thanks
 
Take a look through the finders and imagine what lenses (focal lengths) you might want to put on your camera and consider the framelines and magnification.

M3 has higher magnification, M2 has 35mm framelines. If you wear glasses, you might not see the entire 50mm framelines in the M3 and you may not want to use a 35mm lens. You may like the frame counter on the M3 better than the one on the M2, or not. Only you can decide.
 
It all depends on your style of photography. The M2 has built-in viewfinder framelines for 35mm, 50mm, 90mm.

The M-3 on the other hand has built-in framelines for 50mm, 90mm, 135mm. There are other minor differences, but the field of view is the biggy. Both are excellent, extremely well built cameras.

Bear in mind, that pristine cosmetic condition does not guarantee that the camera will work perfectly first time out. Old dried-up lubricants can cause the shutter to be way off, and you will probably need to have either one cleaned and adjusted to make it a good working camera.
 
It depends on your favourite focal length and what lenses you would like to use. The M3 has frames for 50/90/135mm and the M2 for 35/50/90mm. If you want to use 35mm lenses on the M3 you need lenses with goggles or an external viewfinder.
The M3 viewfinder is nearly lifesize (0.91x magnification), the one of the M2 is 0.72x. If you are more the "tele" type I'd take the M3. If your favourite focal length is 35mm I'd take the M2. For any lens wider than 35mm you will definitely need an external viewfinder on both cameras so if you favourite choice is e.g. 28mm I'd take the cheaper camera.
I own both cameras and you cannot go wrong with any of them. But be careful. If pristine means that the cameras have not really been used they probably need a CLA.
You can find some really useful hints on the webpage of Cameraquest (one of the forum sponsors):
http://www.cameraquest.com/leicamchecklist.htm (checklist) and http://www.cameraquest.com/mguide.htm (buyers guide).
Concerning lenses the choice is yours. You should start with one lens (e.g. 35 or 50mm). More hints also from Cameraquest - http://www.cameraquest.com/mlenses.htm.
I hope this helps a bit for the beginning.
If you are on a very tight budget and you are unsure if you will like the RF system perhaps it is better to look out for one of the many fixed lens rangefinders from the 70's (Canonet QL17-GIII, Konica Auto S2 etc.) They are sold relatively cheap. Just check the classified section of this forum or ebay.

Cheers
Thomas-Michael
 
Last edited:
The lens to use for carryaround in of course the collapsible Elmar 50 or one of the small 35 lenses. That would point at the M2, which has a more practical range of frame lines for general photography I would say.A 135 on a M-series is a somewhat specialized, unpractical lens,IMHO
 
What's your favorite lens to shoot w/ the F3? How much flexibility do you require?

M3: Has .91 magnification and framelines for 50-, 90- and 135mm lenses, but requires "goggled" lenses for anything wider than 50mm.

M2: Has .72 magnification and has framelines for 35-, 50-, and 90mm lenses. IMO, the M2 is a more flexible alternative since it allows shooting w/ the most popular lenses without goggles, and you would have your pick of any manufacturer's wide angle LTM- or M mount lenses.

I have an M2 and love it. The M3 is next on my list. My idea: try both and get both, they would work well together. If you can't get both, decide based on your most used focal length.
 
For many years I wanted an M3. Two weeks ago I bought an M2. Basically I changed my mind because I found that I don't really care to use a 135mm lens much on a rangefinder, but I really like having a 35mm viewfinder.

If I need to use a 135mm lens I will go to an SLR and get the larger magnification viewfinder and a faster aperture at a lower price. That also enables me to use a higher shutter speed to compensate for my aging hands. Meanwhile, the old M2 has a whisper quiet advance lever and shutter.

Bottom line, it all depends on how you shoot.

-Paul
 
Back to your original question, for carry all, do all, lens and camera combination, I really like the M2 with 35mm f2.8 Summaron. A small, sweet package that covers a great many situations. I also got an old collapsible 90mm that I sometimes tuck away in my pocket.
 
I was looking for an M2 for a while, precisely because of the 35mm framelines. However, I bought an M3. Why? Price...

Vile money... :(

Not that there's anything wrong with that! :eek: BTW, I do like my M3, and I'd recommend it to anyone because of the availability of 50mm lenses and the fact that, if you shoot a 50 with one of these bodies, you feel like you have a 35mm lens on the camera.

Trimix, go handle both cameras, and pick the one you like the best! Neither will be better or worse. In any case, you win! :)
 
I have always liked the M3 and have never had an M2 so I am biased. I use my m4-P for the 35mm & 28mm lenses, the M3 for the 50, 90, & 135.

If your main lens is a 50mm get the M3, if it is a 35mm get the M2, if it's both, buy both!
 
:D I did not dare to suggest the same thing I did this year. Could be seen as overkill for the first RF setup. But on the other hand it shortens the process for some people. Once caught it will never end...

Cheers
Thomas-Michael
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom