Fell in love with M3

[zimster]

I have a damaged Canonet QL 17 with 45mm lens so I went to a camera store to check out what else there is. I want a reasonably priced rangefinder with a 90mm lens so I can take portraits and later landscapes.

Also, being curious about medium format I first looked at a Rolleicord, very nice for $175 but weird to hold. What a difference it was to look and see such a large clear view. The thing is like a very deluxe box camera I had in 1960 but way too old-fashioned.

So I said, can I see a Leica? The salesman hands me a two stroke M3 for $795. There is a 90mm lens for $300. He hands it to me and as I look through the viewfinder I say to myself "My goodness, the rolleicord is a lot brighter than my Canonet, but the M3 is so bright. "Who turned the lights on?" I couldn't believe how clear the viewfinder is. But the focusing knob was quite sticky. So I gave it back and looked at the Rolleicord again. I don't have the money now anyway and I just have to get a Leica. I can't stand the Rolleicord.

This newbie who develops and prints his own film has a few questions. Can you use a 28 or 35 mm lens on a M3?
Is it worth it to get a dented and dinged M3 or with somebody's soc sec# inscribed to save money?
Is it possible to get a Leica M3 for $1,000 with any kind of lens in decent shape? If so, where? I have had enough bad experiences with ebay to avoid them for a camera again.

I've read about Bessas. Is a Bessa R worth it? Can I see and hold a Bessa anywhere in Minnesota? Thanks, Zimster

[back alley]

the m2 and m3 seem to be priced lower than normal lately.
if you are ok with a non leica lens then i would think that you could easily get an m3 with a cv 35 or 50. (m2 would be better with a 35)
or a 40/2 summicron or rokkor with an m3 also.

social security numbers have no impact on the image and reduce the price significantly because no one wants it on their camera (well, few).

if it were me, i would try for a user m2 with a 35mm lens.

[Silva Lining]

You can use a 28 and a 35 mm lens on an M3, but it does not have built in framelines for this focal length, so you'd have to use an external finder (or get a Summaron with bug eyes!)

My M3 has seen some use and has the scratches and chips to prove it! I like this as it adds a bit of character, and the camera is mechanically perfect. Others would hate it, so it's up to you..

I got my M3 two years a go for $700 with a collapsible 50/2.8 elmarit so yes you should be able to get a good one on your budget of $1k

I got mine through eB*y, and you take you chances, but less thn 1% of my tranactions have be less than satisfactory....

Bessas are great too! I have a R3M which sits n my bag with the M3!

[nikon_junkie]

M3 is only good for the 50/90/135 focal lengths.

I found the doublestroke annoying, though if it's a good sample, then it is a SWEET camera and a fair price.

With a $1000+ budget I would definatly reccommend shopping prudently for a M6. An Ebay M3 will cost you an extra $250 for a CLA.

[back alley]

there is an m4-2 in the classifieds for 500 u.s. right now. in ok shape but seems a good user.

joe

[sharpf8]

A Leica M3 has 3 framelines for 50, 90 & 135. However, you can use a goggled (with bugeyes) 35mm lens; you can also use a 28mm lens with the aid of 28 mm brightline VIEWFINDER. There is so much material/information regarding M3's-- whether double stroke or single stroke, late or earlier models, with low or over a million serial numbers, etc., etc.

My advice is: buy the camera and lens combination that will suit your shooting needs and enjoy the pleasure and passion of photography.

Good luck to your pursuit of happiness with photography...

[rover]

Is it possible to get a Leica M3 for $1,000 with any kind of lens in decent shape? If so, where?

Have patients and keep looking for a private sale in a "controlled" situation like buying from a known member here or Pnet.......

My M3 was $725 and Rigid Summicron ran me less than $300, both were CLA'd clean users.

You may be able to find an M3 or M2 for less than what I paid if you take your time in looking. Don't rush into anything.

A Canon 50/1.8 will run you less than $200 and be very good........

Yes, $1000 can do what you want it to.

[drewbarb]

I can sympathize- after using a number of M's for several years, I now shoot with 2 M3's, and want for nothing. I use the 50mm lens about 75% of the time, so that might explain something. I have a goggled 35mm lens, and I use a 90mm and even a 135mm pretty often, and wides with finders just as often (21mm and 25mm) and like them all- but your preference for lenses should inform your decision. If you prefer a 35mm to the 50mm, look into an M2. But IMO, an M3 with a clean finder and a CLA just rocks.

These older bodies seem to be fairly low priced right now, so look around. Try Tamarkin and KEH- they both seem to have some good deals listed right now. Don't worry about cosmetics- as long as the function is good and finder is clean, you're in business. Enjoy!

[Trius]

My M3 was a DS, and it didn't bother me a bit after about 1 day of use. I used a 21 SA with finder, along with DR 50 and 90 Cron. It was a sweet setup. If I had it to do over, I'd probably go for an M2, but with the extra dough I'd go for an M5 or M4-P. I'm likin' 28mm FL right now, so the M4-P would get the nod for that, but the M5 wins the metering contest. Note: M5 and lens doesn't meet the $1K barrier unless you're REALLY lucky.

[Kim Coxon]

If you are not dead set on an M3, there is an M2 here for $600 which would leave lots for a lens.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...uct=2230&cat=3

Kim

[Joerg]

Hi,

you may want to give Ken HAnsen a call.
He seem to have some very reasonable priced ones in stock.

212 879 3263

Ciao

Joerg

[zimster]

Thanks everybody for your helpful ideas and suggestions. Thanks, Zimster

[Ronald M]

An M3 is best with 50/90mm. All RF`s are only Ok with 135, but the M3 is the best of the lot by a wide margin.

35 requires bugeye 35 or an auxillary finder.

28`s tax the limit of seeing on an an M4-2 or later .72 camera. M2 and M4 have the same v/f , but without the 28 lines.

I have complete lenses sets for M`s, but believe range finders are best with 35/50/90.

[roundg]

I have(or used to have) the following,

M3, M2, M4-P, M5...as I can say,

m3 is the king of all Ms,

M5 is the monster,

M2 means simplicity........M4-P is a really working horse,

you won't regret by getting anyone of them ....but IMO, M3 is a must have.

[dadsm3]

M2's were 20% cheaper than M3's when first sold. Bugeyed 35mm Summaron's are cheap and (as long as the eyes are clear) won't disappoint.
If 50mm is your normal focal length you simply can't beat an M3. Even 90mm portraits are easy with the .91VF. There are some good deals out there....don't settle for a beater for $750...you'll get a good one for that cash. Just be sure the RF patch is strong & bright.