M3 entry route to Leicadom or is it M6?

[RBruceCR]

Chaps, how is life with the M6?

I felt that the entry route to Leicadom was the M3, MR Meter, Summicron 50/f2, strap, ever ready case and of course overhaul by specialized workshop. Quite steep in cash outlay, probably in the $1,200 plus overhaul!

Today on eBay, my only source from Costa Rica, an M3 with the above configuration and declared for parts or for repair, with the carbonite peeled off commanded $910. The camera looked downright ugly and by not being Canadian nor US Citizen or resident, I was banned from participating.

The prices for the M3's have oscillated in the $1,200 with the said configuration. I have not followed the M6 that closely, perhaps due to Ken Rockwell stating that all the rest Leicas are "would love to be M3's." CameraQuest recommends the M2 over the M3 and the M6 over the earlier ones, but then says that he likes the M3 too.

I had a Yashica Electro 35 GSN, my first camera! It is now under repair, after sitting in never land for the last 25 years, it can still be repaired and it is far from home in CT. I took great pictures of my high school sweetheart, buddies, girl next door and during my master"s degree in Boston. Then it went into disrepair and I got into SLRdom with Minolta and have ever been in this stage. I have even considered a KM 7D if only I could find a specialist with parts and knowledge on how to fix it!

I have yet to fix a Mamiya Press 23, 6 X 9 all manual, all three lenses, 65/4.5, 90/4.5 and a 150/4.5. The size of the film is big. This would be my second rangefinder. I don't seem to have the ability to repair the film backs, the felts arrived a month ago. Technical service is bad in Costa Rica where I live!

Will life with Leica M3 or M6 (don't like the M2, would live with the M4-2 if it had a meter, I am becoming M3 literate, however) be the same as with the Yashica? The cost of the lenses is considerable, and I am even considering selling my motorbike to afford life in Leicadom...

Regards,

Robert

[Richard G]

The M6 is a great camera. If you can afford a metered M and want a meter then this is best. Sure my M2 is smoother, but not by much. I can't understand why you don't like the M2. I also can't understand why everyone raves about the M3. It doesn't have the frame lines for the 35 and I don't even like the frame lines of the M3 for 50 and with glasses I prefer the standard 0.72 Leica finder. The M4 and the M4-2 are also great cameras with the more practical rewind. I won't talk to you about the M5 which I think is great also. M4 might be the best M ever, but a bit more expensive. A late M2 or an M4-2 is probably the cheapest way in to a Leica experience with no compromises. There are those and I'm one of them who think that my button rewind M2 was the pinnacle of Leica design and quality. Make your own judgements rather than listen to unargued opinions of Ken Rockwell or anyone else.

[Pablito]

As someone who thinks of cameras strictly as a means to an end, I prefer the M6 classic over all other M bodies.

If you end up with a non-metered body, I way prefer the Voigtlander meter over any Leica meter.

Personally, I would never buy an M3 for regular use because it does not have the frame lines for the lenses I use the most, and I much prefer the faster loading of the later models. With practice you can load the later M's in a few seconds.

[raid]

I chose carefully two M models that I find superb. I sold the M5 and M4-MOT, and I kept the M6 0.85 classic and the M3. I like using 50m lenses. The M3 ha a butter smooth shutter release, and with a soft release, tne M6 is also O K.

[JayM]

The M4-2 is not a great camera, neither is the M4-P. They should not be worth more than an M2 or any other M for that matter. Do not buy one.

[Pablito]

Originally Posted by JayM

The M4-2 is not a great camera, neither is the M4-P. They should not be worth more than an M2 or any other M for that matter. Do not buy one.

Well, that is one opinion. Others think the M4-P is one of the best. My M4-P is just like my M6 bodies, only with no meter. If you can live with no meter, I highly recommend the M4-P.

[RBruceCR]

Thank you all for the quite stern opinions and rest assured that before committing to one model or another I will have to make a test run. I will have to solve this, however, as there are no Leicas close to where I live.

I will not frown upon an M2 and I will not look with disdain an M4-2 either.

The 35/50/75 frame lines of the M2 sound appealing but I was thinking on the M3 as the entry route but the M6 is mentioned constantly!

Regards and take care!

Robert

[JayM]

Originally Posted by Pablito

Well, that is one opinion. Others think the M4-P is one of the best. My M4-P is just like my M6 bodies, only with no meter. If you can live with no meter, I highly recommend the M4-P.

If you can live with no meter in addition to no pc-sync on a camera that unjustifiably costs more than a camera that is 100% functional from the same manufacturer then I agree.

I'd go regular M2, M3, M4 or M6 over the M4-2/M4-P. To me the slight difference in smoothness isn't as big of a deal as the irreparably bad design.

[Contarama]

I think a M6 0.85 Classic is the safest most practical bet...if you can afford the right glass too...

[Spicy]

Originally Posted by JayM

The M4-2 is not a great camera, neither is the M4-P. They should not be worth more than an M2 or any other M for that matter. Do not buy one.

with all due respect, you don't seem to know what you're talking about.

[ruby.monkey]

A good M3 is a joy to own, as is an M2, and the 50mm Summicron is a beauty. My ERC went to the back of the cupboard as soon as I got it, and I'd be willing to bet that a small hand-held meter (such as a Sekonic TwinMate) is faster and more convenient to use than a clip-on or in-body meter without autoexposure.

[kshapero]

M3 is entry to photo paradise and the M6 is the entry to close to Paradise. My 2 cents.

[Archlich]

Go with M3 first, so that you could appreciate the convenience of the M6's built-in meter.

[Clancycoop]

First of all, don't listen to Ken Rockwell, at least not taking his word as gospel. He has a lot of great information on his site but frequently contradicts himself with hyperbolic claims about the only camera one needs, what formats one should bother shooting, etc.

Anyway, I have never owned a meterless M, but it seems like it would a hassle, especially in moments where you don't have much time to get the photo off and are in a weird lighting situation (shadows and bright light all together in the same area).

My personal experience has been that I got into an "entry kit" and then began selling off the first things to upgrade, taking a slight hit each time.

Buy the best and cry once, I say. I think the best bang for the buck is an M6 classic.

[DominikDUK]

If you absolutely require a meter the M6 Classic is the better choice, if you can live without a build in meter then they are about equal I personaly prefer the M3 viewfinder to the M6. If you plan to use a 35mm lens in the future the M6 is again the better choice no googles necessary.

I wouldn't discount the M5 though, it's beautiful has nice viewfinder and for someone with bigger hands it's the best Leica. You can adapt hearing aids batteries or use Weincell batteries for the meter. It's usually cheaper than either the M3 or M6 and has a meter.

Dominik

[Vincent.G]

I prefer the M2 or M3 because they have relatively less flare prone VF compared to a M6. But I am using a M6 with MP flare free finder. The built-in meter is useful when the lighting is tricky.

Nonetheless it is not a big deal to shoot with meterless cameras as one can easily slip a small handheld meter into the pocket.

[Moriturii]

Originally Posted by JayM

The M4-2 is not a great camera, neither is the M4-P. They should not be worth more than an M2 or any other M for that matter. Do not buy one.

This is absolute rubbish. M4P is the only fully mechanical Leica I'd ever seriously keep/use. And it would take quite a bit for me to use a Leica M mount camera body in the year 2012.

[jychoe]

Just buy the cheapest well working body that you can find..

I own both M3/M2 and I'm looking to sell both and getting a black body because I think it looks better. I'm not even considering if its a M2,3,4,5,6,7.... In the end, whichever one with a better mechanic will work better. There's some minor differences, but its really up to you to choose, not something you can follow someone else for.

There's even pros and cons for the meterless M. I played with a friend's M6 and found out that I get obsessive with the metering and miss the shot a lot. its not like the DSLR system where they show how off I am, it just tells me whether I'm off or not. With meter less Ms, I just guess. I fail sometimes, but Negatives are very generous with me and Sunny 16 rule works pretty well most of the time.

buying the best bang for the buck is always fantastic, but you'll always want to try new things. there is no ultimate M that will satisfy all your needs.

take your time, try different things.

Leica isn't about beautiful cameras, or fantastic pictures. Its about patience.

[jychoe]

Having said that, I think I must say,

My dream kit will be

BP M2, 35 cron 4th, 50 cron with concave tab.
Maybe a GXR with an M-module and more lenses the merrier

[Brian Legge]

Totally happy with my M4.

I think it all comes down to what lenses you plan on shooting and if you want a meter. If you want a meter, take the M6. If you plan on shooting long lenses, go with the M3. For wider lenses I'd go with the M2/M4.

[Leigh Youdale]

I jumped from a IIIf to an M6. As I already had a Bessa R3A with AE, the M6 was a rather emotional purchase in that I thought I should own a Leica before I died. So I sold the R3A.
Never bought any Leica glass - too expensive and the CV lenses for the Bessa are well regarded. No regrets there.

You know what? The Leica is superbly built and feels nice in the hand but the Bessa does the same job - no question - and is much more affordable. If it wasn't for the fact that I frequently use 21mm, 25mm and 35mm lenses I'd probably sell the M6 and get a Bessa R2A. You will note I still have an R4A!
I'd keep the motor bike and look for a Bessa and CV lenses. The only trick is to choose the one with the viewfinder that best matches the focal lengths you want to use. The R2A (or M) covers from 35mm to 90mm. If you want to shoot wider just get an accessory viewfinder to slip on when you have that lens in use.

[wakarimasen]

Originally Posted by ruby.monkey

and I'd be willing to bet that a small hand-held meter (such as a Sekonic TwinMate) is faster and more convenient to use than a clip-on or in-body meter without autoexposure.

I have to agree with this - I bought an M4-P with the MR meter. After persevering with it for a while, I found it to be very long winded in use. I now use the very meter that ruby monkey mentioned.

Good luck in your choice.

Best regards
RoyM

[Richard G]

I also prefer not having a camera mounted external meter and took years to cope with the M6 inboard meter. With the M2 and a 35 I have a Gossen hand held meter. I meter with that for the ambient light using the incident method. I then set the shutter speed and aperture and often prefocus with that lens and then the camera is only up to the eye for the shot. Plus you end up trusting sunny 16 more and not metering for each shot and it is much less hassle all round.

[rulnacco]

Well, I'll offer my 2 pence as I own two M cameras--and they happen to be the M3 and the M6 (0.72 classic).

I started with the M3, and loved it--and still do. Then I got a chance to pick up an M6 from my favourite camera crack dealer (we've got a wonderful old camera shop down in Croydon, South London) at a very good price about a year and a half later.

My personal experience--I tend to use the M6 a lot more than the M3 nowadays.

That isn't necessarily because the M6 is a better camera. I just find that using the camera's meter is a little faster than calculating Sunny F16, which I am pretty adept at and use most of the time (normally successfully) with the M3 (I also carry around a Sekonic L-308s). Unlike with a hand-held or external meter, you don't need to take your eye from the viewfinder to get a reading, which to me makes the M6 a bit faster. For street shooting, that's important.

And, if you were planning on using the 35 as your chief lens, I'd say the M6 would be the ideal choice--its viewfinder and the 35 are a perfect match. I've got a Summaron with goggles, which works fine on both cameras but is a much better fit with the M3's finder. If I had a 35 without goggles, I'd use the M6 even more than I do now.

All that being said, the M3 does have several advantages. I find the viewfinder overall much better than that of the M6. The M6's will flare in certain circumstances, and does it quite often. There are ways to remedy it--but they slow you down by crucial fractions of a second at times and it's just irritating in general.

If the 50 were my main lens, and/or I were wanting to practice getting good at using Sunny 16 instinctively (which, however, you can and should also do with the M6 in order to confirm what its meter tells you), then the M3 is better--the M3's viewfinder is as perfectly matched to the 50 as the M6's is with the 35. And the M3's finder is a lot easier to use with a 90 mm lens, too.

Finally, I don't find the loading of the M3 to be much slower than the M6, once you get used to it. And I found a cheap spare takeup spool on eBay which I carry in my bag. If I'm really going to be shooting fast, I just put a roll of film on the extra spool and keep it in my bag/pocket, so I can just pull it out and pop it in when needed. What is much slower on the M3 is the rewind--I greatly prefer the M6's.

Cost? You'll probably find the M3 to be cheaper by a few hundred dollars. In London, a user M3 goes for around £450, while you won't see an M6 of any flavour at less than £600, and usually you're looking at at least 50-100 quid more than that. M6s with the 0.85 finder and the TTL typically run over £800 owing to comparative rarity and perceived greater utility.

Still, as has been pointed out here, *any* Leica body is fine, as long as it fits your budget. Each has advantages and disadvantages--but you'll never be able to tell from the prints which body a shot was made with. Get the cheapest body you can, and put your money into good glass. (Given the prices of Leica glass nowadays, I'd say go with the Zeiss lenses if you're buying new--they're optically on par in real-world use with the Leica stuff at nearly 1/3 the price.)

[MISH]

I have had my M3 for twenty years but now that I have started wearing glasses I find myself picking up my M4-p most often. Now if you want a real entry level experience let me recommend a nice IIIf kit..... most bang for your buck IMHO. I was like many of the M4-p haters that have never owned one, for years I would have been able to spout off the many reasons I would never want one of those, that all melted away when I had a chance to shoot with one and now I am defiantly a convert