Buying Leica M3 Advice.

[christopher_callil]

<p>Hey all, I've got another post this time about a possible Leica purchase. <br /><br />I'm really want a camera that I can be ultimately satisfied with, and use for the foreseeable future, and on a local auction site I've found this brand new listing:<br>

<br>

LEICA M3 body double stroke, just had shutter speeds serviced $790. <br />LEICA M3 body double stroke in beautiful mint condition..$940. <br />Leica M 50mm F2 Summicron black version III $990..Exc. <br />Leica M 35mm f2.8 Summaron with goggles (Mint) $790. <br />Leica M 50mm F2 Summicron dual range lens (nice) $750 <br>

<br>

For Australia, these are incredible good prices (in terms of buying off ebay).<br>

If I did end I buying an M3, it would be the recently serviced one. It's expensive, so is going down the route of a non-leica lens blasphemy? (Pretty pricey, but I do understand there incredible quality). </p>

<p>Do you guys have some advice? </p>

[aplumpton]

<p>The double stroke Leica is apparently even more robust (opinion of a Wetzlar technician of the time) than the later single stroke one. I loved mine and regret having sold it for a metered Leica. I had problems with the VF prism or optics which blackened and was replaced with the last available part in Canada (at considerable expense), but otherwise no problems. However, if the mint version represents an easier life history than the recently serviced one it may be the better buy if it appears perfectly operational.</p>

<p>Unless you need the speed, the f2.8 35mm lens may be a good option as you need a 35mm VF for other 35mm lenses you may use in future. The dual range Summicron is also a fine lens, but each of these listed are some of the better Leitz lenses. If you want to save a bit, the Cosina-Voigtlander optics are very good (not al the 50mm versions although the f3.5v is a superior lens) and for most applications there is little difference to note between them and Leitz glass. I use the excellent very compact 35 mm f2,5 classic version.</p>

<p>If you buy via auction, ask questions beforehand of the seller about presence of scratches, haze, and other degradation of the glass elements. You need to show a light source through the lens and vary its angle to see this, so obtain a return policy on the purchase if you go the auction route, especially if the seller is in Australia.</p>

[kin_yu1]

<p>M3 -for these prices, you can get one from dealers such as b & h which accept returns with no questions asked. They also slightly under rate the conditions.</p>

<p> </p>

[SCL]

<p>Voigtlander makes some very good lenses for the M Leicas, generally at a discount of 35-50% of the new Leica prices. Zeiss also makes some excellent lenses for Leica, but with a very different result in edge and micro contrast. There are lots of screw mount lenses (Canon, Nikon & others) designed for Leica screw mount bodies which can be used on M bodies with a simple adapter...I would avoid the Russian ones generally as the rangefinder coupling advances at a different rate than Leica designed lenses...making accurate focusing occasionally an issue, although some people have had their lenses reshimmed to better match the Leica rangefinders. Personally, I prefer the older Leica lenses...their rendering and construction are outstanding. In terms of lens selection, price aside, there are many factors to take into consideration....how the lens is to be used, weight, out of focus rendering, and lens optical design/characteistics. You can get a 50mm collapsible red scale Elmar with an adapter ring for about $4-500; this was the lens which made Leica 35mm cameras famous. The lenses you mention are all very good for their time, and would serve you quite well; they do render quite differently than the latest designs. Whatever lenses you do get, make sure to get lens shades for them to realize their potential in bright conditions.</p>

[christopher_junker1]

<p>Bearing in mind your earlier post about the Canon IV BS2, I'd rather see you put your money into the M3, it is a much better camera for the money you have to spend. Finding a "shooter" M3 in good operating condition should be possible at a reasonable price. Yes, Leica lenses are expensive, even used, but you do get what you pay for if they are in good condition. For alternatives, see what cameraquest has in it's offerings. If you are interested in doing close up work, despite the cost, the dual range Summicron is a great lens but you also need the close up attachment goggles to go with it. My best results lately have been with an M3, it's viewfinder eye relief lets me keep glasses on while I am shooting. Take a look on line for an M3 owner's manual, that will give you a good overview on M3 features.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I'm still looking too, so appreciate following these threads.</p>

<p>I may take the advice to just go to one of the major dealers like KEH or B&H. I've been thinking I actually want to get a M4-2, but the M3 to M5 still tempt. I want a shooter, not a shelf queen, so a little brassing is no problem. Basic black is nice too, and goes well with the brass. ;)</p>

<p>What do people have to say about the various Summicron 50mm f/2? (I've read Ken, the men, of course).</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>JDM, I would put equal or more faith in what Erwin says, compared to Ken. I don't have one at present, but the Mandler 50mm f2 (version IV) has always suited my photography with its balanced contrast and resolution and fine outer image quality at the widest apertures. It has I believe a deserved reputation. Puts is not adverse to testing non Leica optics and finding them better in some cases, as he did with one Zeiss 50mm prior to the release of the extremely pricey and more recent aspherical Summicron.</p>

[Jochen_S]

<p>I recommend buying M3s hands on, where you can compare viewfinder clarity and RF patch brightness with later models'. - My M3's finder is better than contemporwry other RFs' but obviously dimmer than an M4-P's and that one is a league below MP & M8 etc. Having the beam splitter prism resilvered in the UK is neither quick nor dirtcheap.<br>

Lenses: buy user beaters. Your pictures won't suffer from lens barrels in questionable cosmetic conditions.</p>

[kin_yu1]

<p>Summicron 50 mm Version IV for sure because of its built-in hood. </p>

[paul_neuthaler]

<p>Mint M3 w/dual range 50 Summicron -- classic combo for M3. Although I am a die hard fan of the 35 1:2.8 Summaron as the beat all around Leitz lens ever, I always felt the M3, with it's big, permanent 50mm viewfinder was the epitome of a 50mm camera.<br>

Now if there's a M2 you can buy with the 2.8 Summaron....that's heaven in my old book. </p>

<p> </p>

[pensacolaphoto]

<p>I may be old fashioned, but I favor using on the M3 the lens of iits time: The Rigid Summicron. It is very high resolution and medium contrast, making is a superb lens that is built with exceptional care.</p>

[jason]

<p>A Leica M3 is a NO.<br>

Why?<br>

I own one, it's my favorite M.<br>

Had it new since 1967.<br>

No matter how good the service or where,<br>

the balsa glue that keeps the viewfinder optics together,<br>

is very old!<br>

One knock can cause end of seeing..<br>

I accept that having an M2 and M6 to fall back on.<br>

I received one of the last viewfinder/rangefinder as replacement, 20 years ago.<br>

Look at newer M's.<br>

I think the M6 is a better buy.<br>

The 35mm Summaron with goggles(which i own) is severely overpriced.<br>

An M6 does not require bulky goggles that have an inherent problem.<br>

The two i have had the rngfdr area is often not correct.</p>

<p>A newer Cosina or Zeiss is close in price, new or used, even less.<br>

Leica is a wonderful system but think with your mind not your passion.</p>