Please help, fellow Leicaphiles! I am still pleased with both my M3 and minilux but now have a dilemma. The dealer who sold me the M3 (early DS model) called to say a collector would like one to complete his collection. I could trade for an M6 (SLAed) body in return for M3 body plus $500. Worth it or not? I do not have to sell. I enjoy using cameras rather than collecting and really can't justify a huge outlay. Points to ponder: M6 meter useful. Old M lenses technically inferior to minilux compact. Could get new lenses. Which is best for travelling? Small compact or M? M viewfinder is excellent, even with glasses. I love using M3, but requires care. Minilux has electronic whirr but faster to use and does produce good results. To further complicate matters, my wife would like a wideangle compact which I could include in trade. Any thoughts

-- David Killick (dalex@inet.net.nz), November 18, 2000

Answers

David,

Every answer you receive will be someone's opinion, so you must filter them through your own mind to see which are more applicable to your way of operating.

My inputs to your dilemma...

First, I believe the Minilux, while a fine camera, is not in the same class as any M series Leica. Not to be cruel, but it is not going to be operating in a few years, and will be either technically impossible or financially prohibitive to repair. For me, it would never factor into any thought process of "Which camera to keep...?" Enjoy it while it is here, but for true longevity, think "M".

Many of us started with an early M series camera and upgraded to the M6. Then again, many never felt the need, since the M3's and M2's are great cameras. Again, speaking for myself, I have regretted every Leica camera and lens that I have ever sold in the quest to move up. At one time I had 6 bodies, all CLA'ed from Leica... but the desire for the M6 allowed me to sell them. I have had my M6 since 1988, but I miss my long gone M3's and M4. I can always come up with money for the expenditure, but those cameras are gone... and another dozen years have past since the cessation of their production.

That said, I did hold back my M2R, and never regretted having the second body. That old saying about "all eggs in one basket" comes to mind. If something ever happened to your M6, it is nice to know you can still make pictures with the same glass. If you ultimately desire to acquire the M6, and you can financially compensate for not selling the M3, then that is what I would do.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), November 18, 2000.

I wouldn't think about the Minilux and the M3 in the same way, as the previous reply said. My opinion? Go for the M6. I had an M3 and an M4, and replaced them with a .72 and a .85 M6. I'm a user like you, and while I appreciate the sublime feel of the classic old Leicas (that M4 was especially tasty), I appreciate even more the pictures they make. IMO the M6 is a far superior picture-making machine - the meter, the faster loading (than the M3, anyway), the ability to add winders and motors of various sorts, and the additional finder frames all conspire to make it more useful than an M3 or M4.

My dream travel combo is either the new M6 .58 or a Hexar RF with a Tri-Elmar and a fast wide-angle. Short of that, I'd take any M6 with a 35 (or the new 28) Summicron, a 50 Summicron and a 90/2.8 Elmarit. I went to St. Lucia a few years ago with nothing but a Yashica T4, and swore when I came back that I'd never travel again without a real camera. And nice as the Minilux may be, it's not my idea of a real camera.

The deal on the M6 sounds pretty good. I'd go for it.

-- Paul Chefurka (chefurka@home.com), November 18, 2000.

Have you played with the M6? Make sure you have before making the swap. Its a very finer camera, but it doesn't have the same feel to me as the M3, and I wasn't that crazy about all the finder lines and the tendancy for "whiting out" in the finder that people have talked about. The TTL meter is very handy--I wish I could buy an M3 with a built in meter, as that would be the perfect camera for me. I use the 50 and 90 the most with the M3, and I didn't like how small the 90 box was on the M6. If you shoot mostly with a 35mm lens, the M6 (or M2/4)is more handy than the M3. I also do not think many of the older lenses are inferior to anything. The DR 50 f2.0, the 35mm 2.8 Summaron, and the 90mm 2.8 Elmarit I have produce images that have astounding clarity. (as long as they aren't full of the dreaded Leica fog!) I am still waiting to see if Minolta comes out with an updated CLE.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), November 18, 2000.

You know David, The M6 is a great camera. I love mine. But I would never, ever sell my M3. It is like a work of art in itself. It is an heirloom. Keep it, and its lenses. They are magical! OK???

-- Steve Hoffman (shoffman2@socal.rr.com), November 18, 2000.

Interesting answers, which hadn't accured to me before, is that there is enough difference in the M-3 and the M-6 that in use they seem more like different makes than variations on a theme. In fact, I still use my chrome M-3 with the meter on top and its clumsy bug-eye wide angle lenses, while the black M-6 sits unmolested in its original box.

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), November 19, 2000.

I thought about replacing my M3 (late, SS) with an M6 over the summer during the prior rebate period in the US. My M3 was sticky and dusty in the finder, so I looked at the M6. I liked the M3 finder better anyway, and after I got it CLA'd, can't imagine wanting to downgrade to the M6's finder. The M6 is a fine camera, no doubt, but in no way superior to the M3.

Of course, I don't mind using a hand meter, as the M mostly accompanies a 4x5...

-- John O'Connell (boywonderiloveyou@hotmail.com), November 19, 2000.

This sounds like a good opportunity to get an M6. In case you have regrets, M3's will be around for a long time to come, regretful former M3 owners notwithstanding.

-- Jim Shields (jim.shields@tasis.ch), November 19, 2000.

M3's will be around, but it can be hard to buy an M3 (or any camera nearly 50 years old) that is in great shape inside and out and hasn't been monkeyed with by mediocre repair people or dropped or otherwise exposed to harsh treatment and/or lousy storage. If the one you now own is in perfect working order and in decent cosmetic condition, I would hang on to it.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), November 19, 2000.

Which ever one you want!

I have a M2 that I have used for 15 years but since getting a M6TTL this spring, it is sitting idle. Both great cameras but that built in meter sure is handy.

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@home.com), November 19, 2000.

Decision is yours. My job has made it difficult to do much of my own photography. I have 3 Nikons with 15 lenses, 3 Mam. medium formats, a Blad, Rollei, a 4x5 A-swiss and a Deardorff, 8 x10. I haven't had much time to use these over the last few decades. In the late 80's I got the chance to buy an M. It was an M-3, DS [virtually new in appearance and in operation] with a black 50 f/2 and a black 90 f/2.8 for less than $1000 from someone that I knew [no one wanted these old cameras then]. This is personal experience, since I am just getting time to do this again [I did it commercially many years ago]; This M3 camera and I get along. It goes with me everywhere and it works well. If you have this bond with a camera, then you don't need to ask the question. If you don't, you need to find your bond.

Art Karr

-- Art Karr (AKarr90975@aol.com), November 19, 2000.

Twenty six years ago,I purchased a Pentax 6x7 camera.I added lenses,tube,tele-extender,filters and enlarger BUT I never used it.....My M3 has been my friend and companion on my trips and assignments all over the world.The M3 is 33 years old and like me has that classic appearance,heavily weathered.Last Saturday,I did the right thing.I bought a M6.I traded the Pentax.I love the drop in loading,its wonderful after my M3.The meter is great.I just received a box of Ektachrome shot at sunset.My exposures on the button.I swear my old Summicron is sharper !I doubt I`d sell my M3,new shutter etc.Your model is different....if the film advance is worn,its big bucks for new one.I know the rangefinder goes white in certain light but I`ll live with it.I find the M6 faster and smoother and most important to me,less intrusive to my picture taking than my M3/2. The point and shoots are not to be compared to an M-camera. Theyre not Leicas.They may be nice.They may be sharp and have great colour.They are not meant for long term use. I find it daunting that my M6 shall outlive me.My M3 has a head start on the M6. I would do the trade.Get that sucker with the built in meter,drop in loading,hot shoe and rewind crank.See what simple folks Leica nuts are !!!!Most of these features I had on a Pentax MX,20yrs ago. As the advertisement for a certain computer said and I repeat out of context, "The M6 is one really "bad" camera.!!!" You will love it.

-- jason gold (jason1155234@webtv.net), November 19, 2000.

Thank you folks, some very useful replies though quite divergent opinions. And yes, I did mean CLA. So far the tally seems to be (subject to hand counting!) eight in favour of keeping the M3 (though one says keep M3 and M6 too), four in favour of getting the M6, and one suggesting I get a Contax G1 or G2 instead. This includes two emails not recorded here. So a huge majority who support the classic M3! A pretty mean feat for any product from the 50s I would think. What shall I do? Hmm. Not quite decided. I love the old M3 and the way it handles, and its viewfinder. Don't mind loading or rewinding. Meter is just about the only thing I would want to change. I take the point that the minilux is a point and shoot. I still think its lens is fine, but in terms of handling and versatility it doesn't come close. Trade M3 and minilux for M6? I think I will keep the M3 and enjoy it unless I get a really unturndownable offer. Any other comments

-- David Killick (dalex@inet.net.nz), November 21, 2000.

David,

I do not know what is your lens used with your M3. It is much easy to use 0.72 M6 with 35 mm (or wider) lens. Also the close focus distance is about 2 feet on M6. Most M3 (?) can only focus with the M3 range finder up to 3 feet. That is the big difference. M3 and M6 complement each other. I also miss the self timer on M3.

-- Kenny Chiu (amchiu@worldnet.att.net), November 21, 2000.

The deal you are being offered is good but not extraordinary. You can move up to an M6 any time you choose. There's no penalty of any kind for turning this deal down.

On the other hand, if you accept the deal, there's a good chance that you'll end up kicking yourself later.

If you later on decide to trade the M3 for an M6, YOU call the dealer, not the other way around.

-- Joe Buechler (jbuechler@toad.net), November 22, 2000.

David, the "whiting out" thing with the M6 is not to be taken lightly. Being used to my M2, it's frustrating as hell to not be able to focus in the presence of backlight. It is the reason that an M7 is needed--aproblem yet to be solved. I am sorry I sold my M3, and glad I still have my M2.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@juno.com), November 29, 2000.

Bob,

one of the threads here has information on how to solve the whiting out problem. I don't seem to be able to find it, unfortunately. The best solution seems to be to reduce the transmittivity of the translucent window using a soft lead pencil. But read before you try !

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), November 29, 2000.