josh_carr

<p>Just a snap, but from my very first roll of film in the M3 (and, coincidentally, the last roll of film with my collapsible LTM Summicron, which is now sold). Velvia 100, brown cast courtesy of the lab that scanned it.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.peeble.com/cron1.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>The DR is excellent value now because the specs don't work on some of the newer cameras.</p>

<p>With a handheld meter and a little care you never get a bad exposure. I shot a roll of Velvia last Saturday in very mixed lighting conditions; in the open, in sun, in cloudy conditions, in deep shade; and 36/37 exposures are spot on; the one that isn't is a stop over but still usable (silly mistake - I forgot to adjust the shutter speed from 1/60 to 1/125 on that one).</p>

<p>I never get that hit rate with a TTL meter, because you have to know how the reflectance of your scene compares to 18% grey and I just can't do that in my head. With a bit of sky and ground in shot the camera gets it right 80% of the time, but that's not good enough for slide film.</p>

<p>As for modern multi-pattern metering; my Lumix digicam gets about 50% of shots completely wrong, and on digital that's disastrous because the merest hint of overexposure blows out any highlight detail.</p>

<p>Always set speeds after winding the film on.</p>

<p>Turn the high speed dial to the speed marked 20-1. Then set the slow speed on the slow dial.</p>

<p>When not using the slow speeds I always turned the slow speed dial back to 20, but I'm not sure whether this is actually necessary.</p>

<p>Note that "Z" is the same as "B" on other cameras,and keeps the shutter open while the button (or cable release) is pressed. "T" leaves the shutter open until you wind the film.</p>

<p>The Elmar is the best bet. Coated or uncoated, all have good contrast because there are only four elements and six air to glass surfaces; a screwmount 'cron has about a squillion, with its little "air lenses". Not especially prone to cleaning scratches, something that can't be said for the 'cron, Summitar or Summar. A good Summar produces amazing pictures on dull days but isn't as versatile as the Elmar because it flares in any contrasty lighting. Summar prices have gone silly now; they were literally giving them away a few years ago.<br>

I'd go for an early uncoated Elmar in good condition, unless you get lucky and find a late red scale Elmar for 230 UKP like I did. Sometimes eBay sellers stick stuff on Buy It Now without researching the market properly.</p>

<p>Watch for balsam faults in Elmars; the rear doublet can separate as the Canada balsam breaks down. You may see concentric rings in a "flashlight test". CRR can separate them, clean them up and re-cement them. My Red Scale Elmar was fixed by CRR and is a bitingly sharp lens.</p>

<p>I have a really good IIIa for sale if you're interested (I'm going over to M bodies due to my deteriorating eyesight) and I'm in the UK. No lens, though.</p>

<p>The only build problem with the M3 is the use of Canada balsam (it's purified tree sap) in the VF prisms. Because of this, none of them will really go on for 200 years; at least, not unless they're kept in an oxygen-free environment. First they go yellow, then they start to separate, then one good knock and poof! No viewfinder image at all. This balsam was probably the best option at the time, to be fair to Leitz.</p>

<p>I must ask my repairer if he uses a modern UV-cured adhesive to stick them back together after he's cleaned up and resilvered them. That lasts indefinitely because nothing in the environment attacks it and it can't start to crystallise.</p>

<p>More recent Ms don't have this problem so an M6 or MP kept in its box will still probably work, after a CLA, when your great great great great great grandchildren find it and go out to take panning shots of flying cars.</p>

<p>The M3 wasn't built to a price - it was the best camera Leitz could possibly build at the time and was aimed at professionals or the uber-rich. Hobbyists would have viewed it as we now look at an S2 or something. Everything since has been built with an eye on costs and the market, although the M2 was a bit more honest about the cost-cutting, being quite openly positioned as a budget alternative to the M3. The M2 has, of course, benefited over the years from its 35mm framelines, the lack of them being possibly the M3's biggest problem as a general-use body and also its greatest blessing (the legendary 0.91x finder).</p>

<p>I only want an M3 and an M2, having used meterless cameras since about 2002. TTL metering is nowhere near as good as an incident reading anyway, because you never know if what you're aiming at is 18% grey, and it usually isn't.</p>

<p>Thanks Gus. I see those bodies also have the small "pit" where the stop might be. The photos are from an awkward angle, but in Rogliatti's book it seems the later IIIcs without the "step" don't have the stop but the early ones do.</p>

<p>I wonder why Leitz went back to an external stop on the f series?</p>

<p>I have just acquired a IIIc in near-mint condition. Apart from a bit of chrome lifting on the wind knob (I'll replace it when I see a good one on eBay) and a slightly bent left strap lug, it's immaculate.</p>

<p>One question though - the rewind lever has no little "pip" on the top plate to stop it, so it can be pushed backwards further than normal to expose "A". There appears to be a tiny hole or pit in the top plate where the "pip" would normally go. Both my IIIa and IIf have the "pip".</p>

<p>So...has it fallen off or was it made like this? Can it be replaced? Is it a hole that can let light into the film chamber? Do I have to be careful how far back I move the lever?</p>

<p>If it helps, it's a 1950 model with "sharkskin" vulcanite, no step on the top plate for the rewind lever, and "Germany" added below "Ernst Leitz Wetzlar" with a slighly stylised letter "y". The chrome is quite different to my IIIa or IIf - much smoother and more glossy. I understand post-war chrome was thinner.</p>

<p>You know it's gone nuts when Summars are going for 200 GBP. Ten years ago they were 20 GBP if they weren't just given away as a sweetener with an LTM body. Actually, a decent Summar is worth 200 GBP, or so I've been telling everyone for years.</p>

<p>Does anyone know why Leitz put the PC socket on the front of the If (where the slow speed dial would go on a IIIf) but the IIf got the PC socket in the usual place on the rear edge of the top plate?</p>

<p>Many unofficial flash conversions of IIIc's and the like put the socket in a more sensible place than the factory did!</p>

<p>My IIf also has a standard PC socket.</p>

<p>Most flashes come with their own special PC cord so you don't have much choice. The flash end of the lead is a non-standard connector.</p>

<p>Tim, are you left-eyed?</p>

<p>It's quite good value in M mount, at least compared to the 'cron.</p>

<p>CRR always have a backlog of two months, have had for the last decade. In practice Peter will fit small jobs in very quickly; he fixed a sticky shutter for me and CLA'd a lens in the last month, and both were done in a week.</p>

<p>Here's a snap with mine, from a couple of weeks ago. I don't think it's ever been CLA'd but it doesn't look as if it needs it much.<br>

<img src="http://www.peeble.com/hands.jpg" alt="" /></p>

 

<p>With the older lenses the number of air to glass surfaces tends to be inversely related to contrast. An Elmar has only six and is pretty high contrast even with 1950s coating technology. A 1st generation 'cron has -er- I lose count, especially with those "air lenses" between the front uncemented pairs. You lose a fair bit of light (so under-rate the film speed) and get lower contrast. The later multi-coatings do a much better job at suppressing reflections.</p>

<p>CRR Luton are normally pretty quick. 375 GBP is not cheap, and obviously more than even a mint IIIc is worth, although you do get a discount on a CLA if it;'s done at the same time. You should see the photos:</p>

<p>http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Leica/page3.html</p>

<p>Peter Grisaffi (UK ex-Leitz man) offers to fit replacement vulcanite. It's not the same rubber-based stuff as Leitz used, but the same in principle; it comes as a stiff sheet which has to be fitted using a lot of heat.<br>

Anyway, he says he doesn't have the sharkskin pattern yet but is getting it manufactured soon. He expects demand for it to be low because yes, the sharkskin type is more durable than the leather-look vulcanite.<br>

Personally I think the IIIa is prettier than the IIIc because it's a bit smaller and has a few more mouldings and lines on it, a characteristic of the built-up construction. I don't find the siamesed RF and VF of the later cameras - I also have a sharkskin IIIc and a IIf - any easier to use, although an M3's VF eclipses them all.</p>

<p>Some people take a Dremel to a new M9 and try and sell it for more money. Weird.</p>

<p>I got rid of the SLR gear. I really don't like them now - the clack of the mirror, the murky focusing screen and the attention-grabbing looks.<br>

What I can't understand is why a pentaprism, mirror and shutter are required on a digital SLR. Why not just have an eyepiece (using a screen on the back is a recipe for camera shake) with an LCD display behind it and a fully electronic image capture? No moving parts, smaller size, no vibration at all.</p>

<p>You can afford a Leica lens. Get an Elmar 50/3.5 and an adapter.</p>

<p>Well, the Summicron arrived today from Germany and (incredibly) it passes the flashlight test. The front and rear elements are as clean as a whistle and there's just a bit of haze inside (evaporated lubricant, probably; it is 55 years old). It's one of the last screwmount 'crons, I think.<br>

It's certainly good enough to use as it is, but as it cost nearly 300GBP I'll send it off for a CLA by Peter Grisaffi.<br>

I'll keep the Elmar for pocketability; if I had to sell a lens, I think it would be the CV 28/3.5, which I have barely used although it's a beautiful little thing to look at.</p>

<p>Ah - if a 28mm was never made, that explains why they're rare. Thanks.<br>

The Voigtlander mini-finder (28 and 35mm framelines) sounds ideal but has been discontinued and the only UK dealer wants silly money for one.<br>

The UK price of a Voigtlander single focal length is getting near the vintage Leitz price now.</p>

<p>You may laugh, but I find the Zorki/Kiev Russian accessory viewfinders perfectly acceptable and, in the case of the "universal" type, preferable to the Leica ones like VIDOM and VIOOH. They're also a fraction of the price of Leica or Voigtlander finders.<br>

Does anyone know if (a) they are still made and (b) where I might find a 28mm one? I've just got a 35mm one from eBay and it is extremely good. At the moment I can use the universal one for 28mm, which is accurate enough, but it's a bit bulky and unstable.</p>