Leica M3 vs Konica Hexar AF [Archive]

Moriturii

01-28-2011, 00:18

Paul T.

01-28-2011, 00:28

I sold my M3 and kept my Hexar AF as my main work camera so...

I does depend how you see yur photography, though. THe M3 is more tactile, a pleasure to use, like driving, say, my old Volvo Amazon. THe Hexar probably gives better results in crucial situations, and is reliable, like my VW Golf.

Arjay

01-28-2011, 00:51

The Hexar AF has a lot of very clever functions such as silent mode (I mean really silent), spot measurement and the super intelligent P-AE mode.

But, as Paul T said, the M3 is more tactile. When I started using the Hexar AF, I first had to become familiar with the Hexar's rather unconventional user interface. The camera features a number of clever functions, but these are operated using a very small number of insufficiently labelled multi-purpose function keys.

E.g. manually prefocussing this camera, and even locking a given focus position is possible, but it is a bit clumsy as the corresponding buttons are not laid out very intelligently. You need to take the camera away from your eye to find and reach the buttons. Also, you need to memorize some keypress combinations, or else you might get stuck during camera operation.

Once you have memorized these functions, however, this camera is a pleasure to use.

Keith

01-28-2011, 01:18

I've always wanted to try a Hexar but I voted for the M3 ... though in my opinion an M2 would be a better comparison because it can match the 35mm focal length.

That 1/250 max shutter speed of the Hexar would worry me!

Juan Valdenebro

01-28-2011, 01:26

They're so totally different I don't understand why you go from one to another as main options...

They differ in:

Different lenses
Autofocus
Meter
Autoexposure

They're not like different cars, and they're not like a car and a motorcycle, but like a car and walking...

I think you can decide more than anyone around, the way you want to photograph... In one extreme, the M3 does nothing for you, and you decide everything, and in the other extreme, the Hexar AF does everything for you... With one you'll be slower and you'll miss some shots, and with the other one you'll be faster and you'll hardly miss shots... But what matters is what you want to feel while you do it, and if you plan to photograph slowly because you'll shoot mostly scenes that don't change, or if you plan to do street/people instead and also be ready for low light situations...

Basically most (but not all) you can do with the Hexar AF, can be done with the M3 most of the times (but not always), and mastering the M3 can take years, while mastering the Hexar AF can take -maybe- a few days...

Finally, the Hexar AF has manual mode like the M3, and spot metering on that manual mode, so you can work slowly and decide everything when you prefer to be in charge...

And to make it harder, yes, a Leica is a Leica, and will last longer... And needs no batteries...

I can be sure you'd enjoy the Hexar AF a lot more after doing it the hard way with the M3... Perhaps you could "be taught" by an M3 for some time, and just leave the Hexar AF for the future..

Cheers,

Juan

Arjay

01-28-2011, 01:29

That 1/250 max shutter speed of the Hexar would worry me!
That's not really a problem, as you won't use this camera to e.g. photograph car races. See this thread (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100856) and read Juan's article (post #19) for a very reasonable solution.

fixbones

01-28-2011, 01:58

I started film and RF photography with a Hexar AF.

Sold my Hexar AF eventually.

If i have to pick between the Hexar AF and M3..... I'd pick the M3 anyday!!

Moriturii

01-28-2011, 02:01

Very good points everybody. As far as they might be too different of a cameras doesn't bother me. I lump them in as cameras to take picture with, they're all the same to me. 50mm or 35mm whatever, they're both great and I love whichever I would get my hands on as far as focal length goes.

Then again, I guess I can always buy one, try it, sell it and get the other, bit of a hassle though isn't it. Ah choices choices.

kshapero

01-28-2011, 02:38

The M3 will put you more in touch with your inner camera soul. But each to their own.

umcelinho

01-28-2011, 02:58

M3. Without the batteries, the Hexar AF is dead, right? So the M3 should be more reliable. Oh, and it will probably last forever. :)

ferider

01-28-2011, 03:00

They're not like different cars, and they're not like a car and a motorcycle, but like a car and walking...

Pretty much. Where the Leica is the car for me. :)

I never understood the "one Leica, one (35mm) lens people". For those, the Hexar AF is better, IMO. I used it like this and it's a really great camera.

The major strength of the Leica is interchangeable lenses. With a 50/1.4 or 90/2 and M3 I can do stuff I could never do with the Hexar. Even with an M2/M6 with 35/1.4 I am more flexible due to speed.

Spyro

01-28-2011, 03:09

Eh, apples and oranges, but some really lovely apples and oranges. I think the only correct answer is both.

By coincidence, I saw a guy shooting his hexar af in the street yesterday. He was holding it vertically to his eye with his one hand, the other hand tucked under his elbow. He was doing full body street portraits, moving slowly, momentarily stopping in front of every person he was photographing and pressing the shutter . The camera was doing everything else, and knowing the camera it was doing it correctly. Tick-tick-tick, barely audible and never skipped a beat. I followed him around for a a while and nobody seem to pay attention to him, he was like a ghost. He never changed his grip, never used his other hand, never lowered the camera or changed settings, all he did was frame. Nice.

Juan Valdenebro

01-28-2011, 04:48

Surely this poll -as all of them- will reflect Leica is the winner: the better brand, but it won't reflect the best tool for the member asking... An M7 with autofocus would be the better tool, because of interchangeable lenses, durability and mechanical back-up if compared to a Hexar AF... But comparing a Hexar AF with an M3 is like comparing a scientific calculator with a pencil. If both are dropped, one of them can suffer more...

An M3 is a great pair of durable shoes, and the Hexar AF is at least a bit faster than that... :)

Cheers,

Juan

ruby.monkey

01-28-2011, 04:55

more practical and user-friendly, travel-friendly Konica Hexar af, with metering, great AF etc etc.
Canon S95. Seriously.

v_roma

01-28-2011, 05:05

It really does depend on what you're looking for. For a fast, quiet, user-friendly film camera with great lens and features, it's really hard to beat the AF. It's the perfect tool, I think, for street photography for example. Like people said, you'll be much less likely to miss shots with a camera like this. If you want a more traditional, slow and, as someone also put it, tactile experience of using a film camera, then it's probably an M (though I don't actually own one).

EDIT: Perhaps more telling than any explanation is the fact that I am selling my Hexar for something more manual (and in the face of some good advice I've gotten from these forums :)) because I am looking for that tactile experience. I feel I can get the more automated shooting experience with my old digital SLR and want something different from my film camera. It really is a great camera, though, full of characters and more than the sum of its parts, I think.

v_roma

01-28-2011, 05:06

M3. Without the batteries, the Hexar AF is dead, right? So the M3 should be more reliable. Oh, and it will probably last forever. :)

And without film, both are useless. :p If you can carry extra film, you can carry extra batteries.

umcelinho

01-28-2011, 06:04

And without film, both are useless. :p If you can carry extra film, you can carry extra batteries.

oh, but batteries are so big and a such hassle to carry ;)

rover

01-28-2011, 06:05

Canon S95. Seriously.

I was thinking that this is such an apple or orange question that I was going to suggest Hexar AF vs Fuji X100.....

but I personally decided in favor of the S95 myself.

rover

01-28-2011, 06:06

Other than that, M3... more what I would want, but what does what I want have anything to do with what you want?

Warren T.

01-28-2011, 06:13

I had a Hexar AF and I really enjoyed using it. The lens was spectacular and the camera performed very well and was intelligently designed. But for me, the automation while convenient was also a drawback for me. The major drawback was the AF. The lack of a mechanical focusing mechanism/focusing aid was the one thing that bothered me. Even though the Hexar had the focusing crosshairs and focus confirmation (that it has locked on), one does not really know "exactly" which spot it locked onto. When you are shooting at wide open aperture, a slight change in focus point might make the difference between great shot, a mediocre shot, or blown shot. In the great majority of the cases, the Hexar will focus just fine, but when I started seeing blown shots, this issue started getting on my nerves.

I eventually sold the Hexar because of this. This just my personal experience, YMMV.

As others have said, the M3 is a completely different animal altogether, probably 180 degrees opposite. The M3 is my main RF camera.

--Warren

Broke

01-28-2011, 06:22

I had a Hexar prior, and a bunch of M's --I definitely prefer the M's. The main things that detracted from the Hexar (for me) were the slow top shutter speed, and the fact that I didn't like the rendering of the lens at F/2. I found that I was always trying to think of what the camera was doing for me, which values it was choosing for me. I like to make those decisions myself. It is a very well built and comfortably handling camera.
Hope that helps a tad.
Cheers,
Jim

Paul T.

01-28-2011, 06:30

Funnily enough, I've never really had the drawback of mis-focusing on the Hexar, after a while you get use to its foibles (a little bar top right gives you focus distance). But its metering really doesn't like backlit situations in my experience, it's also a very contrasty lens, so I do personally prefer the 'feel' of the photos I get with my CL (or got with my M3). Of course you can adjust for it later, but it still has a distinct signature.

Small sample, admittedly, but it's impressive that the Hexar has polled half the number of votes of the M3, considering how iconic the latter is.

Keith

01-28-2011, 13:08

That comment about the auto focus confirming that it has locked on in the cross hairs is interesting ... by it's nature it can't really show you exactly what it has locked on to I guess. When an SLR focuses you are seeing exacly what you will get image wise.

It's obviously not a major issue though.

filmfan

01-28-2011, 13:28

Juan!
You are driving up the prices for everyone else...:mad:

Matus

01-28-2011, 13:47

I never used any of the two, but already considered both. To me the main question is - what is the intended use? A more dedicated approach that gives you more time to measure the exposure (or guess it), set the exposure, focus? Than go with a M film body. But for a travel where you want to be able to get a nice shot which may come up when you are not 100% ready or the conditions are quickly changing - the Hexar AF will have an advantage.

On my "quest" for a travel film camera I already tried Olympus XA, Fuji Silvi Zoom f2.8 (pretty much a P&S with 25 - 50 zoom lens) and recently Konica Auto S3. While I like the S3 (still a rather compact) I already was in a situation where I was not able to focus fast enough - and would have preferred to have the Hexar AF instead.

Up to large extend - when it comes to AF high end P&S cameras - I am torn between Hexar AF - fast AF, silent, great 35/2.0 lens, but LARGE - and the Contax T3 - good lens, small, but only 35/2.8 and expensive.

If the Hexar AF were smaller - it would be for me a clear choice. I guess I will have to give it a try someday :)

Richard G

01-28-2011, 13:54

Out at lunch yeseterday with the new Hexar I missed two shots that I might well have got if I'd had my wits about me, shots which I would never have got with my Ms. So the automation is the great thing. My first roll showed very much the Japanese signature high contrast and I will find that a problem I suspect. I was using colour, Ektar, and maybe this will be less stark with black and white - I don't know. Finally, while I am loving the automation and cleverness of the Hexar, from the first few shots I was immediately confirming in my mind my preference for a fully manual camera for shots that are not time-critical. Last evening I went out with the M5 and 50 Summicron and was pleased to be back in familiar territory. So I didn't vote. While I laud Mike Johnston's one lens one camera notion, it was only for a year, and I think it is great to have different cameras and the merits of one contrasting with another make you love both more. I think this is different to men who put forward a similar argument in relation to girls, and closer to the pleasures of driving different cars on a regular basis.

bensyverson

01-28-2011, 13:55

Mister E

01-28-2011, 15:20

Yeah, the M3. I hated my Hexar AF.

dave lackey

01-28-2011, 15:54

Well, Juan's thread on this Konica Hexar af (http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100856) threw my big plan into a loop. I thought I'd get a Leica M3 and settle with that camera for a long time to be honest but now using a Konica Hexar AF seems very appealing. Now be honest, if you had to have only a Leica M3 (the one I am eyeballing comes with a 5cm f2 close-range lens and has a serial of over 1.000.000) and I might be able to get it for about 700-800 bucks I think. It's in fine shape, nothing exceptional, normal used.

OR

Well, what seems to be a million times more practical and user-friendly, travel-friendly Konica Hexar af, with metering, great AF etc etc. The especially nice thing is that I can probably get this for half the price. Since I am a poor ******* that is a big plus!

If you had to pick the one or the other, which one would you recommend for me? :)

Thanks guys!

Well, I can relate to not having a lot of cash, or any. Having been out of work for 30 months now and medical bills piling up, shelter and food come first. The rest comes later...or never.

However, no one that I personally know on this forum is in quite that sad shape, so if you have a budget for a camera system, go for what you want and keep it! If you want the M3, you will always want one until someday in 30 years you might find one and wish that you had bought it. People are just weird that way.;) If you are of this personality, buy the M3! I did two years ago when I could afford it and it has been a marvelous time. The M3 is special.

OTOH, some people are extremely frugal and that is most important. If you are like this, great! Buy the less expensive camera and lens and start shooting! Your images will thank you!:)

I hope this is just more confusing for you....;)

Note: I have never seen or held a Konica camera, so take that for what it is worth.

dave lackey

01-28-2011, 15:58

The M3 will put you more in touch with your inner camera soul. But each to their own.

Ah, yes, soul. And such a seductess as well...rewards you with a kiss with every photograph taken.:angel:

Juan Valdenebro

01-28-2011, 20:11

It's funny... People say the Hexar is large, yet a Leica is compact. Well, the Hexar is large compared to a T3, and the Leica is compact compared to an SLR. But of course the Hexar is smaller and lighter than an M3.

I would say that if you have at least 1 or 2 seconds per shot to focus, don't bother with an autofocus camera. I rely on autofocus because I shoot my fiancé and friends, and 1 or 2 seconds means the difference between a good expression and a "when is he going to take the photo?" expression.

Yes, different situations are handled the best and most joyful ways with different cameras... That's why I prefer to carry more than one camera... Cameras are tools more than brands... Instead of a Leica M I use an R4M and an R3A because with them I can do a lot more than I can with any M: it's just as simple as that... Now I carry a Hexar AF too, because it's light, and because it can do things Ms can't and Bessas can't... It doesn't mean I'll stop using my Bessas or Nikons or XA or Hasselblad or Leica IIIF: it means now I am ready for getting images I couldn't get with other cameras no matter how well I used them or how fast I coud be with them... That's the very high value of the Hexar AF as a tool above great RFs. And to me Hexar AF is designed for very competent photographers, and not for amateurs: it implies you really know what you're doing and you need to have several variables in your mind and take decisions quickly... It can be used as a point-and-shoot, but to get the most out of it, you should be trained in photography and manual cameras before... Just my opinion...

Cheers,

Juan

Juan Valdenebro

01-28-2011, 20:19

Juan!
You are driving up the prices for everyone else...:mad:

Hi Sam,

I hope not! I want another one...:p

Well, thinking it better, Hexar AF is not that good...

Cheers,

Juan

xhrl

01-28-2011, 22:43

if i could only select one and live within its range of opportunities, i;d take a M3 over the hexar af in any season.

Juan Valdenebro

01-28-2011, 22:54

If I had to pick one camera/lens for the rest of my life, it would be an AF SLR with a zoom.

And yes, then I'd wish I had never known the beauty of RFs and fast prime lenses...

Cheers,

Juan

sanmich

01-28-2011, 22:57

The two options here exclude each other.
You want to shoot 50mm and beyond?, take the M3.
You feel content with one FOV, and it is the 35mm, the Hexar.
now if you want a range of FOVs and the tactile feel of leicas, you have lots of good options (M2, M4's, M5, M6 M7, MP)

Beemermark

01-29-2011, 05:59

I've had both and have used both extensively. The M3 is great for sitting by the fire with a glass of fine wine. Just feels so good. Add you can pretend you're a famous photo-journalist.

However, if you want to take really great photographs while walking around and not worry about fiddiling with a light meter, trying to rewind film with the goofy rewind crank and then trying to get new film loaded, buy the Konica. The lens is as good or better than the early Summicrons. Really quiet. Of course no one will mistake you for that famous photo-journalist.

Juan Valdenebro

01-29-2011, 06:24

Some people care more about tools than about brands... It depends on the assignment...

Cheers,

Juan

bmasonoh

01-29-2011, 06:39

..., they're all the same to me. 50mm or 35mm whatever,...

Based on this comment and another you made suggesting the lower price may fit your budget better, I'd say that the Hexar is the better choice. Notice I'm not saying its the better camera since we're talking about two completely different animals.

FrankS

01-29-2011, 06:44

A rather bizarre comparison/choice because they are so different from each other. The best choice depends completely on what and how the OP plans to photograph. They are very different tools, each very, very good at what they do best.

If AE and/or AF is important, the Hexar AF
If lens options, manual control, and dead reliable mechanical operation are important, the M2/3.

Moriturii

01-29-2011, 09:50

Richard G

01-29-2011, 10:17

Fun to see this thread still going. I have decided, it shall be the M3. Because a good opportunity shouldn't be missed. :-)

Tune in next week where I make a new thread and say that I bought a Contax G2 with 45mm f2 instead :-P

Thanks all, great forum.

Ha ha, nice one about choosing the Contax instead. Reminds me of the quote whose author I am uncertain of: The art of politics is to say that you will do one thing, while all the while intending to do another. And then, when you do act, you do neither the thing you said you would do, nor the thing you intended.

ampguy

01-29-2011, 10:25

This pretty much sums it up for my preference of the Hexar AF over the M3.

I've never owned an M3, because the fim loading is too slow, and I'm pretty sure that the M3 doesn't do 35 without special lenses and goggles or addl. VF or accessories. I could be wrong about this though.

The M6 with quick loading, 35mm support, built-in meter might be a better Leica model to compare with the Hexar AF.

I've had both and have used both extensively. The M3 is great for sitting by the fire with a glass of fine wine. Just feels so good. Add you can pretend you're a famous photo-journalist.

However, if you want to take really great photographs while walking around and not worry about fiddiling with a light meter, trying to rewind film with the goofy rewind crank and then trying to get new film loaded, buy the Konica. The lens is as good or better than the early Summicrons. Really quiet. Of course no one will mistake you for that famous photo-journalist.

adamjohari

02-01-2011, 03:09

weird. my buddy who knows nothing about cameras said that my Leica M3 looked like a toy. :D . anyways, i can't say which is better since i've never used the AF. but so far the M3 has been excellent for me. if you're a really good photographer of course you could use an instant camera and still take better pictures with it than say a noobie like myself using an M3. same as with bourne driving a mini cooper with finest compared to uncle bob who drives a beamer.

but really, the M3 coupled with skills can produce amazing images. it also keeps me warm at night.

jsrockit

02-01-2011, 04:13

You can't go wrong with either really. Do you want an old school mechanical camera or an old school automated camera?

However, in general, just beware of internet hype regarding either camera... you are likely to be disappointed if you do not do your own research.

bobyswan

03-15-2011, 19:49

I found the Hexar RF body movement to give less palpable than my M3 and M6. The Hexar trigger simulates a soft launch in M. Also, I think the 100 ms or less shutter delay allows some of the "finger wave" to shut down. For better control of release Shutte, I equipped my M-series bodies with big Tom Abrahammson soft release buttons. The large size provides a better control of release, especially at slow shutter speeds.

Gary Sandhu

03-15-2011, 20:27

M3.
I have both.
I miss less with the M3 because it's simpler to use.

Mablo

03-16-2011, 00:17

I am a new Hexar AF owner and I must confess I'm all over the moon with it. The learning curve is steep at first but not too demanding (even for a dummy like me). I can't believe that €300 or so can buy a camera of this caliber.

Moriturii

03-16-2011, 00:51

Well, a little update. I got a Leica M2 with a 50mm lens. This camera came with a 35mm f2.8 lens, summaron. I sold it for about 700 bucks and bought a Konica Hexar AF (which is my new "35mm lens") with yellow, red and uv filter, flash, in box, mint for half the price. Waste not want not.

pb908

03-16-2011, 01:10

in my past experience with hexar AF and leica (M2):
- there are times that I wish I bring hexar af (i can focus at 100% darkness, I can shoot 1/8s with no shake, I can focus QUICKER enough to get some decisive shot, I CAN SHOOT it while driving and get correct focus !!)
- at some point while using hexar, i miss manual focusing
- at some point while using hexar in daylight, I wish it has 1/4000s shutter
- hexar is "big" as big as leica M for me, but it is lighter. I had once open the top cover and I can say the top cover build with very thick metal (aluminum?) maybe around 2-3mm thickness. that impressed me a lot!
- the silver hexar AF is so SEXY (it is sexier than silver M6, imho)
- the spotmeter (in M mode) is really worth to have (I normally use spotmeter for MF, to analyse scene, so it's a plus to have it on HAF)
- the Optic (35mm f2), is a steal !!! trust me
now I already sell my hexar af to add some cash in my wallet, and i keep missing the lens on hexar AF !!!
- at the end, I'll grab (if I still have it) HAF for night/lowlight shoot with no doubt !!! and use other for daylight shot.

Now I have hexar RF, but it's like hit and miss for me, it has some point I want on hexar af, but at the same time I really miss the hexar AF lenses, it's quiet shutter (the focus can be a little bit noisy, but the shutter is deadly silent). too bad now the price is higher than before..