Wondering which Leica

[Roger Hicks]

I respectfully disagree: you can get amazing deals on M bodies where the leatherette is flaking off. . . .

But "condition" ain't just the body covering. See "Five Leicas" on my .eu site. The M3 with a proper strip, clean and overhaul (NOT just a cheap "CLA") could be restored to "as new" condition and would probably outlast all the others.

Cheers,

R.

 

[David Hughes]

I wish I hadn't read this thread as I am happy with my M2 but you all will keep pushing the M4 and M6. Please don't keep doing it. ;-)

Regards, David

 

[Roger Hicks]

I wish I hadn't read this thread as I am happy with my M2 but you all will keep pushing the M4 and M6. Please don't keep doing it. ;-)

Regards, David

Dear David,

Well, I currently have all three, and the one I'd keep is the M2.

Cheers,

R.

 

[d_c]

I've also had all three but the one I would reach for the most when I went shooting was, by far, the M6. I've now got an M 262 which is my go to, but I also kept the M6.

 

[farlymac]

Do a bit of research into what features are available on which model, Kev, and then figure out which one would fit your style of shooting the best. It's the route I took after getting a CL just to see if the M system really worked the way I hoped.



As for me, the M4-P seemed ideal because of the frame lines going from 28mm to 135mm. I don't mind the dual frames in the view because it acts as an alignment feature, helping me keep my verticals straight.


But later on I wish to get an M2 for something like a grab-and-go set-up, with a 35-50-90 lens line up. Plus, if you're lucky, you can find one that has had the easy load adapter installed.


PF

 

[Mute-on]

Dear David,

Well, I currently have all three, and the one I'd keep is the M2.

Cheers,

R.

Whilst I don’t have an M6 to compare, I couldn’t agree more!

M4 really isn’t made as well as M2. Close, but not quite. The M2 purity of function is unsurpassed.

J 🙂

 

[santino]

Is the M2 actually an M3 without auto frame counter, self timer and different frame lines? I mean does it share exactly the same parts despite the above mentioned differences? As far as I know it was a "cheaper" alternative to the M3.

 

[David Hughes]

Dear David,

Well, I currently have all three, and the one I'd keep is the M2.

Cheers,

R.

Hi,

I know, I know but being sensible is a little overrated. Luckily I can't afford the other two.

Regards, David

 

[mcfingon]

Is the M2 actually an M3 without auto frame counter, self timer and different frame lines? I mean does it share exactly the same parts despite the above mentioned differences? As far as I know it was a "cheaper" alternative to the M3.

The M2 is quite different, as it has a different rangefinder and frame illuminator window setup from what I have read (0.72 magnification versus 0.92), as well as slightly different styling, which is the basis for all the more modern Leica designs. Later M2's had self-timers as an option. So, it's really quite different in its parts. I would say quality of use is equal as I had both an M3 and M2.
John Mc

 

[a.noctilux]

My choices are two M-A after using for some decades M2/3/4/5/6, less time using MP.


If you can afford, M-A is best choice then MP best second.
Leica Camera still makes MP : I think that is quite a miracle.
A la carte program MP second miracle in our "throw away society".

 

[giganova]

My choices are two M-A after using for some decades M2/3/4/5/6, less time using MP.

The OP has $3k for body+lens. I don't see how an M-A and lens would come in at this budget. 😕

 

[Takkun]

Another M5 vote. I love mine--I have gorilla hands that it fits, spot meter, shutter speed in the VF (can't say that about the M8 in manual mode...) find the vertical lugs very convenient. It's an oddball some consider ugly and hasn't had quite the collector interest as others. After a DIY RF adjustment and cleaning out the horribly dusty eyepiece, its's what I reach for every day.

If you go that route, watch out for ones with a few notable problems. A damaged meter cell is an obvious one, but another is a cracked shutter drum. I had the latter problem with my first example.

 

[johannielscom]

Just so you know, a table with specifications of all film M Leicas is here... https://www.johanniels.com/en/camera-gear-blog-posts/leica/41-leicamspecs

 

[Eric T]

OK - I will shift gears a bit probably to everyone's dismay.
A near mint Fujifilm XPro-1 can be had for well under $500. Great lenses are available.
It has the rangefinder form factor but is vastly more functional than the film-based Leica M.
I have a Leica M1 and have owned a Leica M3 and a Leica IIIf. They are fun up to a point but the work flow is very time consuming. Sorry...
Again, all a matter of personal preference. No one is "right" or "wrong" here.

 

[Ricoh]

Unless you're purchasing new I would factor the cost of a CLA, these things are mechanical and need servicing to run true and to prevent metal to metal wear. A CLA is not cheap but neither is a proper service on your car.

No one seems to have mentioned the top plate of the M6. They were manufactured at a time when Leica were cutting corners and used 'pot-metal' (zinc) instead of brass.

 

[Papercut]

Unless you're purchasing new I would factor the cost of a CLA, these things are mechanical and need servicing to run true and to prevent metal to metal wear. A CLA is not cheap but neither is a proper service on your car.

No one seems to have mentioned the top plate of the M6. They were manufactured at a time when Leica were cutting corners and used 'pot-metal' (zinc) instead of brass.

I agree that budgeting for a CLA is prudent, but I also think that one shouldn't just send a new camera off for a CLA as a matter of course without trying / testing the body first. I've bought every one of my Leica bodies used (M4, M6, IIIc) and none of them have needed a CLA until years after I purchased them. Yes, the potential is there to need a CLA immediately and so one should factor that potential cost into the whole equation of buying into Leica, but if I had sent all three bodies off for an immediate CLA I would have wasted about $1000 or so. A non-trivial sum. To give oneself the best chance of avoiding that sort of unnecessary expense, the best advice is to buy from a reputable seller who will accept returns or who has an established reputation in places like RFF. Yes, I know there are miscreants even here, but on the flip side, I bought my M4 from a long-term and well-respected member here (Gabor) and his description that the camera was working perfectly was exactly right. I used that M4 for nearly a decade before I needed to send it in for a CLA, so it's not an inevitable expense upon purchase.

 

[Ronald M]

Budget is no Leica at all. Old ones can suffer from age related problems like delivered RF mirrors and deteriorate light seals around film gate. Most that are for sale will need a cla now or soon. You are not likely to detect these issues without experience.

I have purchased many and spent as much on repairs for each as original cost. Consider them like sports cars or classic cars. Upkeep and maintenance is very expensive , but the toy is fun to have.

 

[philosli]

I think to help you narrow down the field, ask two questions first: (1) do you need a in-camera meter? (2) do you use any lens wider than 35mm? Then use this chart to get started: https://cdn.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/static1-620x468.jpg

A good, used Summircon 50mm gen. 4 will run you close to $1000 on eBay. A Zeiss ZM Biogon 35mm F/2 or F/2.8 mint or new will cost you about $600-$800. After two lenses you'll have about $1.2K to spend on a body. You can choose an early M6, or earlier M models + a CLA.

I do recommend buying a recently serviced M or budget a CLA. For example, M4, after 50+ years since leaving the factory, is prone to have shutter curtain issues if the shutter curtain hasn't been replaced. So if you decide on a M4 with no CLA record, budget $300 for that in the (near) future. A M4-P with a recent CLA work should cost <$1000.

 

[ptpdprinter]

You’re going to get dozens of suggestions but look through the galleries here to get a good idea of how different lenses perform.

I don't think you can tell how individual lenses perform by looking at images in the galleries or the threads. The images are all over the board. Some are soft, some are sharp. Some are low contrast, some are high contrast. Some show flare, some don't. Some show muted colors, some show saturated colors. It's a potpourri. Some much depends on how they were shot, how they were processed, and how they were scanned. The only way to see how they perform is to try them yourself.

 

[Deleted member 65559]

"M4 really isn’t made as well as M2. Close, but not quite." Tell that to Jim Marshall & other pros who used the heck out of their M4s....;;