Whats it like using a M3 with a goggled 35

[dd786]

Hi Guys,

Im looking at getting either an M3 or an M4. I shoot 50 and 35.

Whats it like using a M3 with a goggled 35 compared to an M4 with a 35 and no goggles?

Obviouslly the goggles will add extra weight and thickness to the camera body relative to an M4 without goggles but what else?

A few "leicamen" that i know have all said the same thing to me:
"dont get an M3 if you want to shoot 35"

 

[capitalK]

Why not an M2?

 

[froyd]

Slightly greater minimum focusing distance w/ goggles; potentially lower lens price.

Had a goggled lens and did not enjoy the experience for the reasons you listed in your original post.

 

[dd786]

Do the goggles change how the image looks in the VF? Does it magnify what I'm looking at or make everything smaller?
I'm guessing it makes everything smaller.

 

[Bill Clark]

Do you have to use goggles?

I have a 35 LTM I use on my Barnack with no goggles.

At any rate, works for me.

 

[dd786]

Do you have to use goggles?

I have a 35 LTM I use on my Barnack with no goggles.

At any rate, works for me.

And no external VF?

 

[Dan Daniel]

Yes, you have basically the same vision field/frame size as with the 50mm, but it now shows the 35mm image. So it doesn't maintain the same image size but add more around the edges. It reduces the image size to fit into the existing 50mm view.

Slight reduction in brightness due to the extra glass. I seem to remember that the rangefinder spot remains the same size since it sits behind all the glass that changes the view. Maybe someone can confirm this since I do not have an M3 with googles at the moment.

If you know you are going to be using a 35, I would get the M4 or M2. Me, I would go for the M2 for the cleaner viewfinder, but that's minor all in all.

 

[dd786]

Thanks Dan, makes sense i guess.

If you know you are going to be using a 35, I would get the M4 or M2. Me, I would go for the M2 for the cleaner viewfinder, but that's minor all in all.

I did consider the M4 but they seem to be a fair bit more than the M3s. Also, apparently the M3 is going to be Way better for 50mm if and when i use that.

Apparently the M2 isnt as good as the M3/4, build quality wise but cant remember the arguments tbh.

 

[dd786]

Slightly greater minimum focusing distance w/ goggles; potentially lower lens price.

Had a goggled lens and did not enjoy the experience for the reasons you listed in your original post.

Thanks Froyd, im not going to have the opportunity to actually test how much extra weight and size it adds for a while...

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

This is uninformed. The M3 finder is optimized for 50mm, the M2 is optimized for 35mm, the build quality the same. M3 does not have 35 frame lines. M2 has manual reset frame counter, many M2's do not have a self timer, both save cost. The M2 range/view finder is different, I doubt a cost saver. If you favor 35mm over the 50, choose the M2, if you favor 50mm choose the M3. I use both 35 & 50, shoot without eyeglasses, the M2 is ideal. If you wear eyeglasses while shooting, I hear the M2 is difficult with 35mm.

Apparently the M2 isnt as good as the M3/4, build quality wise but cant remember the arguments tbh.

 

[bayernfan]

Apparently the M2 isnt as good as the M3/4, build quality wise but cant remember the arguments tbh.

i can tell you this is absolutely not the case. M2 build is equal to M4 and M3. In fact, my M2 has smoother operation and better 'feel'.

 

[hendriphile]

With the goggled lens attached, you look through the viewfinder, and...
What you see are the same frame lines, same viewfinder patch... except that what is inside the frame lines is what the 35 mm lens will “see” instead of the 50. So of course objects seen from the same distance seem smaller with the 35 mm lens attached than with the 50 mm lens attached.
The view is slightly less contrasty.
The ability to see outside the frame lines is the same as with the 50 mm lens.

Other than that, the difference is mostly cosmetic and a minimal increase in weight.

 

[Deleted member 65559]

David & Bayern fan have it right...M2 build quality is top notch. The M3 is optimized for the 50mm, in so far as it magnifies the view. I've never bonded with the M3... I've used M2 and M4s. They are both brilliant. I like having the 50mm centred with the smaller magnification as it allows me to see things about to enter the frame. The quick load feature of the M4 is also a bonus. I don't care for the overloaded framelines of the M4-P & M6. The M2 & M4 are definitely my happy place. I've used the goggled lens & i find the combo heavy, differently balanced & awkward. It's an engineer's solution but i think it messes with the way an M camera handles...
IMG_6106 by on Flickr

 

[Huss]

Here's my M3 w/ goggled 35:



I also have M4, M7 etc etc that have a the 35mm frame lines. I already had the M3, and picked up the goggled 35 as a lark. To see how it works. And cuz it's fun and cool. Even though I have 'regular' 35mm lenses to use on the other cameras.

My take? The image in the VF is slightly lower contrast than w/o, but still completely fine to use. The camera's handling is affected and you will notice. It makes it front and top heavy, compared to putting on a 35mm lens w/o goggles. But it doesn't actually prevent you from doing anything! Just something to note.

If I was starting from new, and I was going to shoot 35 and 50, then 100% I'd get a Leica with 35mm frame lines built in. Yes the M3's VF is the best for 50, but the other camera's are pretty darn good too!

Oh, another reason to get the goggled - Brie Larson on Kong...

 

[Bill Clark]

And no external VF?

Correct.

I don’t use an external viewfinder.

 

[Livesteamer]

I have no experience with the goggles but, my first Leica was an M3 from Don Chatterton and a well used 35mm Summilux. I used that combo for years with no auxiliary finder and got used to it. Not optimal but workable. That was 1990. Since then I have acquired two M6 cameras, an M6 .72 and an M6 .85 . I use the .85 finder for fast lens's and 50 and longer. I use the .72 for most everything else. The .85 finder has 35 frame lines but they are hard to see with my glasses. Good Luck whichever way you go. Joe

 

[Ko.Fe.]

If you are 50 at most, then M3 might be OK, but it is not true 1:1 VF.
If you are wearing glasses, M3 50 frame might be not an optimum.
I prefer M4 frames for 50. I liked goggled Summaron on M4-2 for 50 frames. Gives more desision space with 35 lens.
And I liked SBOOI so much, I sold M3 and never hesitate to have SBOOI on M4-2 for true 50 1:1 experience.
Same could be done in the opposite. 35 brightline VF and compact 35 lens.

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

Did you notice an uptick in interest and price after the movie? I think so.

Oh, another reason to get the goggled - Brie Larson on Kong...

 

[splitimageview]

The previous posts pretty much cover things, although when I weighed a goggled Summaron I was surprised at the weight, it was lower than I expected. I consider M bodies to be rather heavy anyway, but the added weight of the goggles I found to not be of any consequence.

However, there is obviously more bulk.

The view is slightly less contrasty unless the goggled lenses are a bit hazy, of course, in which it would be more noticable.

I much prefer the RF patch on the M3 over any other M, so a goggled lens is a good option if size doesn't matter, or if you want a lower priced lens than the non-goggled versions.

 

[punkzter]

I purchased an M3 a few months ago. I had originally wanted an M2, because I wanted the option of shooting 35mm, but a good deal on an M3 came up, and I went for it.

I guess I'm still keeping my eyes open for an M2, because I would like to get a 35mm lens, and the goggles really don't appeal to me.

With that said, I've been very intrigued by what people are saying about the impact of wearing glasses. I wear glasses, and even with the M3 50mm frame lines, I can't see 100% of the image. I'll admit this is a little frustrating.

My hunch is that I'd be able to see the full image with the M2 and 50mm framelines, but am I correct that with 35mm on the M2, I'd have an issue?

So I might be better off with the goggled 35mm lens and the M3, or just an external viewfinder?