my dilema...what would you do?

[matt_m__toronto_]

currently shooting with a mint m3. friend is selling an m2 (i

recently advertised it here.) the m2 is not mint. apart from the

framelines, and the frame counter the m2 and m3 seem to be the same

camera. i will be getting a 35mm lens...this is where having the m2

would be an advantage, i also like shooting with 50mm most of the

time, this is where the m3 shines. without a doubt, i will venture

into a 75 or 90 in the future.

 

so, do i sell the mint m3 then purchase the m2 for obviously less,

thus having $ left over. or do i hold onto the m3, buy the imarect

finder so i can use the 35mm and treasure it dearly?

 

keep in mind, i'm a shooter not a collector. right now i'm leaning

towards selling the m3 and getting the m2.

 

can any of you persuade me otherwise?

 

i'm looking at the differences between the two cams, and there doesn't

seem to be much (other than frame magnification). i believe they are

both equally quiet in operation.

 

thanks.

 

m

[bobtodrick]

Matt...I think you should base your decision on how much you'll be using that 75 or 90 mm when you get it. With the M2 the 90mm frame lines (IMO) are pretty dinky and hard to use. As I did in the past you may end up using an accessory finder for the 90. What I found was that, when using the accessory finder on an M3 (or my IIIg) parallax is not much of an issue. I tend to frame quite loosely when using wides, and I seldom end up with cut off heads and the like. On the other hand when using the 90 I tend to try and frame tightly and when using the accessory finder found I was too often missing elements of the image due to parallax error. So if you are a wide-angle kind of guy, get the M2, but if you like teles, then keep the M3.

[sl]

Matt -- the obvious answer to me is to have both the M2 and M3 which is the way that I have gone. I cannot imagine having only one M body.

[glenn_warren]

You need both. Two bodies are a bare minimum, three would be better;)

[matt_m__toronto_]

don't plant those "i need both" seeds in my head :-) at this time, i can't justify having both. right now, i'd see myself opting for the 75mm over the 90mm and using it mainly for portrait work. i do not see myself using the 75mm lens more than 10-15%. although the m3 is perfect for the 50mm lens and 75/90, it's a pain when using the 35mm.

 

whereas, the m2 will have framelines for both, it'll just magnify the image less, so focusing has to be taken a little more seriously.

 

i'm young though, my sight is excellent and so far, focussing the 50mm on the m2 seems fine.

 

from a practical/financial view, i think that selling the m3 would be the wise decision. i would come out of the deal with money in my pocket, i would then be using a camera that is not in mint condition and would allow me to use my two lenses without accessory finders. (another purchase saved until maybe the 75/90)

 

although, if anyone would like to sponsor me to hold onto both of the cameras.... ;-)

[bobtodrick]

Uhhh...guys...maybe funds are tight and Matt is actually looking for a bit of advice to help him out here :-)

[rolfe_tessem]

My two cents:

 

Keep the M3. Add either a 35 Summicron with eyes or a 35mm finder. The Voigtlander ones work fine and are cheap. When funds permit, add a second body.

 

If you sell the M3, you will regret it almost from day one and will eventually end up buying another one back for more money. There are many of us on this list who have been there, done that :-).

[mark-j]

Matt:

 

As Bob Todrick advises, keep the M3. I use a 35 and sometimes a 28 on an M3, and loose framing is not a problem. I use the 50 framing and add a bit on ALL side for the 35 and it works okay. A lot of people here have multiple bodies (myself included) but you work with what you have.

 

I have a 35 3.5 Summaron with eyes that works on the M3, but it is not very sharp wide open, so I am currently using a 35 2.0 Canon on an M3 for travel purposes. The build quality on the M3 and M2 is similar, and as you so aptly put it, you would lose $$ on the swap.

 

Good luck.

[matt_m__toronto_]

agree with all of what you guys are saying, but the point is, i wouldn't be losing $ on the swap. i'd be selling my m3 for at least what i paid then i'd be laying down a portion of that $ for the m2...this leaves me with cash in pocket to maybe sell my 35mm 3.5 summaron for either a 2.8 or a 2.0 cron.

 

that is why the dilema. both cams are similar...holding onto the m3 will be a great treasure down the road (if kept in same condition) but taking the m2 will put cash in hand...

[james_.1]

Keep the M3, otherwise I think you might regret parting ways with such a nice example.

[glenn_warren]

Sorry Matt. I can't afford two bodies at the moment either, although it is my eventual aim to get a second. IMO you should get a cheap 35mm shoe mount finder for the M3 (they work fine, ask Al Kaplan), and get a second lower mag body when you can. Why get rid of an M3 you know and love for the undiscovered country of an M2? On the other hand...

[karl_georg_wolf]

Matt,

 

it depends wholly on the kind of lenses you would like to use most. Years ago I sold an M3 to get an M2 instead. I prefered (and still prefer) the 35 mm-focal lenght to all the others. And this M2 is still around and works fine.

 

Having that mint M3 perhaps also leads to the fact, that you do not live out your photographic potential. With a pristine camera I´am much more careful than with a shooter. So you might get better photos with the M2 in the end ...

 

In case you have longer lenses in the future you can always check if that 1.25-magnifier on the M2 would work for you to increase the focus-abilty of the longer lenses.

 

BTW there are a few differences between the two cameras despite the viewfinder:

 

- an older M3 might still have the double-advance,

 

- the framecounter is sort of awkward with the M2. It can easily change position when shooting and I´am always unsure about the correct setting. Being in a hurry you can sometimes forget putting it to zero ...

 

 

Good luck in your decision

and best regards

[gerry_szarek]

Matt do NOT sell the M3 you will be sorry if you did.

 

Step one, buy a cheap viewer/addon thingy for the M3 ie voightlander (sp), theny buy one 35F1.4 (the old one) non aspheric, should be able to find a good user lens out there.

 

Now for step two, for a second body, buy a Hexar RF, it's great for wide angles, and it's cheap, the other option is a bessa R2. Now remember this is a back up for the M3!

 

Gerry

[richie chishty]

Matt:

 

Keep the mint M3. Believe me, you will regret selling the M3! Buy a CV 35mm brightline finder for under $150. Then you can use 35mm lenses with your M3. This is what I did because I like the M3 cameras very much. :-)

[matt_m__toronto_]

with the extra cash in pocket from selling the m3 and buying the m2, i could afford to see a shrink down the road to convince me that i did the right thing ;-)

 

this magnifier for the m2...where could one find this and for how much?

 

the m2 would be as much of an undiscovered country as the m3 as the m3 was only acquired a month ago and has only seen a few rolls of film...thus i'm not yet mentally attached to her.

 

...yet i am hearing a lot of "don't sell the m3 even if it means you getting an extra lens." so maybe i should take the advice of those who have travelled this well worn path and keep it.

 

happy st patties day to all ye irish!

[john_r._fulton_jr.]

Matt--This may come as a shock, but the M3 is NOT the end-all, be-all, holy

grail of Leicas. It's a camera. There is nothing wrong with selling an

M3--especially to buy an M2. The M2 would be the answer to using the 35 to

its best potential and works just fine with the 50mm. If you only want one body

then by all means dump the M3 and buy the M2. The M3 is a wonderful

camera. It's a fine camera. But--again a shock--it's not for everybody. Worry

about the 90mm later.

[sandler]

I'd suggest shooting a bunch of film before deciding, but basically I'm with you Matt. If your goal is to take pictures, and one body has to go, sell the more valuable one and shoot with the less expensive one. You'll get the same photos and won't be as upset if you bang it up a little bit. I bet you'll be just fine with a 75/90 on the M2.

[al_kaplan1]

You really do have a dilema there! You know that not only is your M3 pretty clean looks wise but works just fine. The M2 might have unseen problems. Getting a CLA will wipe out your profit from the swap. Neither the M2 or M3 has a frameline for the 75, unless someone had one installed later but I wouldn't call the 75 corner dots a "frame line". The cheapest way out is a 35mm finder. Then you can start saving for an M2 as a second camera. One of the older 35mm Summicrons will be your best bet. The older Summiluxes are not as sharp, although from f/4 down they're pretty damned good. If you really need the f/1.4, and only shoot higher speed films at that aperture, the grain tends to mask the optical failings of the lens, other than slight vignetting. Good luck. It's a tough decision.

[jay_.]

My advice would be to do one of two things. Either 1) hold onto what you've got and if you dont wear glasses smush your face up tight against the M3 and use the extremes of the finder to frame the 35, or if you do wear glasses get the C/V 35mm finder. Or 2)(And this is by far the better advice if finances will allow)wait a couple months until the MP is in stock and there's a short-term dip in used M6TTL prices as people with more money than sense make the move. Then if you don't wear glasses get an 0.85...or an 0.72 if you do.

 

A third but much less rational option would be to sell the M3 for the M2 and buy a 1.25x magnifier which you could use with the longer lenses. But as was already said, you're trading down, condition-wise, and you might end up needing a CLA or worse, a new rangefinder if the M2's decements.

[ray .]

If it's your friend's M2 you should have the chance to shoot with it a bit. If it's in nice mechanical working order and not too banged up, I would go for it if it meets your functional needs better than an M3. Auxiliary finders are OK, but given the choice it's more practical to shoot without one. You don't need a magnifier to focus with an M2, it focuses fine as is. You could find a mint M2, as a 3rd alternative.

[matt_m__toronto_]

jay...cosmetically i would be trading down yes, but mechanically the m2 is excellent...rangefinder is bright and accurate and shutter speeds are on, no loose parts, just some cosmetic wear.

 

one fear is keeping the m3 because of the condition it is in, and then scraping it against a wall or having to hammer in a loose nail ;-) thus knocking it into user condition...

 

ugghh...i think i'm treating this like a life altering decision which it is obviously not.

[ray .]

Or get an M6 classic.

[sven_sampson1]

I'm on the same track as Al, but I would recommend keeping the M3.

I would purchase the Voigtlander 35mm viewfinder and save my pennies for a used 35mm Summilux.

 

- If the M2 hasn't had a CLA in some time, count on spending

somewhere around $200-$250 to get it done right.

 

- To get really precise focusing with the M2 and a 75/90, I would opt

for the magnifier. The 1.25x Magnifier can be bought used for

about $175.

 

 

When all is said and done, I don't think you will save much money by selling the M3 and buying the M2.

[ray .]

If your eyes are young I wouldn't even worry about a 1.25 magnifier. You don't have a 75 or 90 yet anyway- but it wouldn't be a critical issue even if you did. You can focus those lenses with a .72 finder just fine.

[paolo_folzani]

Matt, I had the same dilemma when I had to choose between M2 and M3. I bought M2 simply because 35mm is the lens I use more and I'm very satisfied of my choice. But for telephoto and portrait of course M3 is more precise and easier to focus (now for this I use R7 with 100 and 180, but it another body, another system and another money ...) In any case, before selling a mint M3 I'd think 2 times: try it again for some months to discovery her soul, then you'll decide. May be you'll save some money and you'll keep both the bodies (best solution). Best regards. Paolo