m3 owners help please
Old 12-24-2015   #1
arseniii
Registered User
 
arseniii's Avatar
 
arseniii is offline
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 348
m3 owners help please

Merry Christmas RFF!

I recently acquired a M3 s/n 876xxx which was born as a DS and later converted to a SS version by Leica back in 60s. I ran into the following issues compared to the modern Leicas and was wondering if other M3 owners can confirm their copies are the same way.

Issue.1: film counter resets to "-2" meaning I would normally get to 1st or even 2d frame when I load the film the same way I do for a modern MP

Issue.2: the frame spacing is narrower compared to the modern Leicas. It is even but is less than 1/8 of an inch. Visually smaller from the ones other cameras produce.
__________________
More by korshe~ on Flickr and korshe.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-24-2015   #2
Rob-F
My Avatar Is Missing
 
Rob-F is online now
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 75
Posts: 4,183
Yes you can get an extra frame or two with M3, M2, M4, and others.
__________________
May the light be with you.
-----------------------------------------------------
OK, who took my avatar? This is getting old.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-24-2015   #3
lonemantis
Registered User
 
lonemantis is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 141
Resetting to -2 is normal - the camera expects you will wind two frames before you hit 0 (which is the first frame). It doesn't really have any impact except that you count a bit differently.

As for the frame spacing, my M3 is tighter than any of my motor wind cameras. As long as it's even and never overlaps it shouldn't be a problem. Do you know if it has been serviced anytime recently? If the film advance mechanism needs work then it could cause that issue.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-24-2015   #4
arseniii
Registered User
 
arseniii's Avatar
 
arseniii is offline
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by lonemantis View Post
Resetting to -2 is normal - the camera expects you will wind two frames before you hit 0 (which is the first frame). It doesn't really have any impact except that you count a bit differently.

As for the frame spacing, my M3 is tighter than any of my motor wind cameras. As long as it's even and never overlaps it shouldn't be a problem. Do you know if it has been serviced anytime recently? If the film advance mechanism needs work then it could cause that issue.
It was claimed to be serviced by the previous owner. It was serviced by one of the very respectable technicians in Canada (David Yau). I am still curious if it need some adjustment or its behaving the way it was intent to be
__________________
More by korshe~ on Flickr and korshe.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-25-2015   #5
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,041
The negatives of the older Leicas are larger than those of the more recent ones. Therefore the spacings are narrower. I always have difficulties with cutting the film for storage. It is normal.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-25-2015   #6
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,510
All is normal.

Later M models actually have smaller actual image areas and therefore wider spacing. Each advance is still the same number of sprocket holes.

DS is one pain in the a... Supposedly done to slow you down to stop static electricity damage.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-25-2015   #7
photomoof
Reluctant Moderator
 
photomoof's Avatar
 
photomoof is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,233
I used a DS M3 for several years in the '80s as my travel camera. Shot a lot of slides with it. I never had a problem with commercial lab cutting and mounting them.

I think the spacing is standard, the images just slightly larger, or the machines would have screwed the slides up.

I had a glass plate DS, never minded the DS, never found it to be a PITA, just the way it worked.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-25-2015   #8
arseniii
Registered User
 
arseniii's Avatar
 
arseniii is offline
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 348
Thanks for the input folks! Seems like nothing to worry about with...
__________________
More by korshe~ on Flickr and korshe.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-25-2015   #9
Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
 
Dez's Avatar
 
Dez is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Minnesota North Woods
Posts: 1,337
Spacing is standard on all 35mm cameras except funny ones that don't use the sprockets: 8 holes. There are slight differences in the width of the frame, resulting in different width gaps.

Cheers, and Merry Christmas!
Dez
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-25-2015   #10
LChanyungco
Registered User
 
LChanyungco's Avatar
 
LChanyungco is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Berlin
Posts: 578
My double-stroke M3 spaces frames normally with a 50mm but when i use a 21mm the negatives get really really close to each other :

  Reply With Quote

Old 12-25-2015   #11
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 61
Posts: 2,250
I have a double stroke that was converted to single stroke and a double stroke that has not been converted. They both start at -2 and they both have tight frame spacing.
__________________
"Your 1st 10,000 Photographs Are Your Worst"
HCBresson

"My 2nd 10,000 Are Not A Lot Better"
Dan
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-26-2015   #12
photomoof
Reluctant Moderator
 
photomoof's Avatar
 
photomoof is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by LChanyungco View Post
My double-stroke M3 spaces frames normally with a 50mm but when i use a 21mm the negatives get really really close to each other :

That is bizarre.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-26-2015   #13
lukitas
second hand noob
 
lukitas's Avatar
 
lukitas is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Brussels, belgium
Posts: 680
Quote:
Originally Posted by photomoof View Post
That is bizarre.
Not really. Depends on the angle at which the light rays strike the negative. The light rays from a wide angle can spread a little behind the mask. A tele lens should make a slightly smaller negative, providing for more blank space.
Even a light source near the edge of the frame can spread into the 'non-exposed' area.

Cheers
__________________
lukitas

Gallery

photos by lukitas
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-26-2015   #14
presspass
filmshooter
 
presspass is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Posts: 690
I have a double-stroke and a single-stroke. The DS spaces the frames much closer together than the SS [which was built as a SS, not a conversion]. I have the same issue with a 21 and the DS. I have been told that the spacing on the DS cannot be adjusted, but I don't know if that's true. BTW, too much strong tea is as bad an idea as too much wine if you're getting ready to cut DS negs into strips.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-26-2015   #15
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,041
The best way to cut the film between two negatives close together is done by watching through a stereoscopic loupe (watchmakers or camera repairers) with high quality scissors against a headlight.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-26-2015   #16
photomoof
Reluctant Moderator
 
photomoof's Avatar
 
photomoof is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukitas View Post
Not really. Depends on the angle at which the light rays strike the negative. The light rays from a wide angle can spread a little behind the mask. A tele lens should make a slightly smaller negative, providing for more blank space.
Even a light source near the edge of the frame can spread into the 'non-exposed' area.

Cheers
I was interested, and looked at some of my 21 photos made with Leica (M4) and with a Nikon (S2), no difference in spacing. Super Angulon, and Nikkor 21.

Maybe a bad pressure plate? Nikon openings are not at an angle, just looked closely at my S2, 90 degrees.

Or just peculiar to the DS? Beats me, those are really close, almost overlapped. My Nikkor in particular is really close to the film, and has a very large rear element.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2015   #17
leicapixie
Registered User
 
leicapixie is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto.Canada
Posts: 1,097
The wider image and less spacing mentioned in many Leica books.
It is normal. I saw it all the time with 21mm Super Angulon.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2015   #18
LChanyungco
Registered User
 
LChanyungco's Avatar
 
LChanyungco is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Berlin
Posts: 578
the image is near panoramic. you can see the curve of the lens hood on the bottom corners of each frame.



Quote:
Originally Posted by photomoof View Post
That is bizarre.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2015   #19
photomoof
Reluctant Moderator
 
photomoof's Avatar
 
photomoof is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by LChanyungco View Post
the image is near panoramic. you can see the curve of the lens hood on the bottom corners of each frame.
I noticed that, but I no longer have my M3 to look at the film frame, it must be chamfered in some way to allow that to happen? My Nikons have no angled frame, so there is no expanded frame size.

I do have one S2 however that is a mess wind-wise and so does some really odd spacing. I just live with it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2015   #20
Vincent.G
平和、愛、喜び
 
Vincent.G's Avatar
 
Vincent.G is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Age: 37
Posts: 1,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by LChanyungco View Post
the image is near panoramic. you can see the curve of the lens hood on the bottom corners of each frame.
My SA 21/3.4 produces very narrow frame spacing on my M2 but not as tight as yours which seems almost touching each other!
__________________
My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2015   #21
LChanyungco
Registered User
 
LChanyungco's Avatar
 
LChanyungco is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Berlin
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by photomoof View Post
it must be chamfered in some way to allow that to happen?
The M3 is unmodified since my grandfather bought it in 56' But you've given me an idea to file the lens hood a little in the lower corners. I don't mind the spacing but it is bizzare for sure.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent.G View Post
My SA 21/3.4 produces very narrow frame spacing on my M2 but not as tight as yours which seems almost touching each other!
Almost, but there's enough space for scissor blades to fit :-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2015   #22
arseniii
Registered User
 
arseniii's Avatar
 
arseniii is offline
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 348
The left one is from the M3+50mm Planar
The right one is from Canon 1-N + 24mm

The Leica exposed frames are indeed a tiny bit wider than Canon (1/16 of inch)
My MP (current variation) has the same spacing width as the Canon
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_9886.jpg (24.4 KB, 18 views)
__________________
More by korshe~ on Flickr and korshe.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2015   #23
photomoof
Reluctant Moderator
 
photomoof's Avatar
 
photomoof is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by arseniii View Post
The left one is from the M3+50mm Planar
The right one is from Canon 1-N + 24mm

The Leica exposed frames are indeed a tiny bit wider than Canon (1/16 of inch)
My MP (current variation) has the same spacing width as the Canon
I think it has to do with how "high" the film rails are. On my Nikon S2 they are only .2mm at most, so there is not much room for light to slip under the two ends.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #24
aoresteen
Registered User
 
aoresteen's Avatar
 
aoresteen is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Newnan, GA USA
Posts: 450
My IIF & If are tight as well with the 21mm & 15mm lenses.

I solved this issue 20 years ago. With B&W film, I shoot a blank frame between every exposed frame. I get 18 shots per 36exp roll. Sounds weird and wasteful but spend a day in the darkroom with 35mm cut negatives that have clear "handles" on each end and you will love the idea.
__________________
Tony
______________________________________
If RD, IIIf RD M3-Mot M4-P Contax IIa BD Nikon SP 2005
Cambo 23F 6x9, Olympus OM, Pentax M42, 6x6 & 6x7

De Oppresso Liber
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 17:20.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.