Dear Forum:

In the not very near future, I wish to have a high-mag body for my 90 Summicron. Not that my M6 0.72 misfocuses, but it is a good treat for my eyes. Additionally, I have a 35 summicron and a Sekonic L308B.

Which is high-mag body to get? M3 or 0.85? I understand that they both have their own goods and bads, one is not strictly superior to the other. Just like to hear more from many experts here.

I never touched an M3 before. How exactly do you load film? Is double stroke inconvenient? I know that M3 rangefinder design is different from M2/M4-/M6. The light paths of the M2/M4/M6 are diagonal while the M3's is horizontal. Why did they change the design, if the M3 rangefinder has won so many praise as the best of all M?

I do not intend to start a war between M3 and M6 users, as it frequently happens. M3 and M6 are one family.

-- Jackson Loi (jsloi@hotmail.com), June 21, 2001

Answers

I use both, Jackson. While aesthetically I enjoy the M3, film loading is not convenient (removable takeup spool) and frame lines are limited to 50-90-135. Also don't forget the sheer age of the two cameras, the metering convenience of the M6, and the increasing difficulty of getting parts for a DS M3. On a regular basis I use the .85 M6, and I would not hesitate to make the same choice over again.

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), June 21, 2001.

Jackson

I think that the M3 has the nicer viewfinder and is higher magnification so is more accurate. Also remember many M3 are single stroke. The loading is perhaps more difficult (I never found it so). It also has fewer more complete framelines which are very nice - but it lacks the 35mm and 75mm frames. The M3 is a more beautiful construction but is different in subtle ways if you have an M6TTL.

Personally, if given a choice I would probably go for the 0.85M6 as it has the built in meter and a hotshoe and has the non glasses scratching eyepiece. But in terms of pure viewing pleasure the M3 is the best of all Ms in my opinion. It depends a lot on whether you will be using flash, separate or clip on meter, or want to use a 35mm or 75mm lens. If you don't need any of these then the M3 is perhaps a better choice.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), June 21, 2001.

I guess that I agree with Robin, somewhat. It really depends on what you want to do and what your preferences are. I use both, but strongly prefer the M3 finder. I have never become used to all of the garbage in the M6 finder. My M3 has served for decades. I use it from 35 mm through 135. Yeah, I know; no 35 mm finder frame. But the whole view finder is about 40 mm [at inf] and I have had no problem in adapting. Adapting comes with age.

Loss of a meter is important if you need to make quick pictures [like street photos]. Makes no difference to me. I use a spot meter. My subjects are static.

So figure what you want to do. Then go from there.

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), June 21, 2001.

The M3 finder (in cleaned up condition) is a joy to use with the 50 and 90 and even 135mm. No finder flare, and no extra un-needed boxes in your field of view. The main problem with any older camera is that finding and buying a good one can be difficult and frustrating. If you can locate a decent camera (and they are around if you look hard enough)and have it cleaned and lubed by one of the best Leica technicians, you'll have an exceptional body to use the 90 Summicron on. I vote for the M3 on its "coolness" factor alone-you got to love a camera made in the 1950's taking great images in the 21st century.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), June 21, 2001.

I haven´t try the .85 finder yet, but for my 90 summicron I have a M3 and it´s a joy to use, film loading is after a wile not a big deal, and you can send it to put the other kind of film loader.

-- r watson (al1231234@HOTMAIL.COM), June 21, 2001.

I have been using a pair of M3's for 30 years and they are a joy to use. Both were double stroke, now converted to single. I still "double" stroke the M3's from habit. Mine have the quick-load kits in them, and loading them is about 3-5 seconds slower than my M6 .72 non-TTL. I like the finder in the M3 for low light, no flare. If your M6 is a non-TTL, you might consider the M3. On the TTL versions the shutter speed dial rotates the oposite direction from all the rest of the M's. The main drawback to the M3's are previously mentioned: metering, loading and age. I enjoy the feel of the M3's but I miss the meter of the M6. The masks for the lenses are easier to see in the M3 and it isn't as cluttered. I have a 90 Summicron also, and I like it better on the M3. It's your choice, but enjoy them.

Mark J.

-- Mark A. Johnson (logic@gci.net), June 21, 2001.

Jackson:

I use an M3 DS with a 90mm lens and an M3 SS with a 50mm lens. Compared to the finder of my Leica M6 TTL, the M3 finders are slightly dimmer, but the long lenses are much easier to focus accurately. Also, the M3 finders never flare out like the M6! However when I use the M3, I do miss the TTL metering of the M6! Both of my M3s were bought as relatively cheap "user condition" cameras. I had Leica USA CLA both cameras and replace the peeling vulcanite with an M6 type covering. Now both M3s look like new cameras, even though one was made in 1954 and the other one in 1961. Film loading with the M3s take time, but you get used to it. A good compromise would be to buy the 0.85 M6 TTL. I might do that one day, but I will never sell my M3s! They are classics!

-- Muhammad Chishty (applemac97@aol.com), June 21, 2001.

Excuse my poor English. If I have well understood Erwin Puts, the range finder of the M3 is the most accurate of the Ms, and very good for your 90. Personaly I have bought a 0.85 M6 with Apo Summicron 90 Asph: excellent lens, very sharp (quite "too" for women 's portraits at low distances); the depth of field is small in this case and I'm proud to have made this choice. Why a M6 and not a M3? For all the reasons precedently wrote, for the light meter and the TTL fonction: M6 + SF20 = easy

Alain Besançon, "bonjour" from France

-- alain.besançon (alain.besancon@chu-dijon.fr), June 22, 2001.

Hi, Jackson: I think that if you can manage yourself without on board light meter (be it that you measure light by just looking around or by means of a hand held meter) and don't make flash photography then there is no Leica like the M3. In other words, if it happens to be convenient to your photo style, there is nothing better. I normally use 35mm (with "eyes"), 50mm, 90mm and 135mm lenses in my M3s and feel very happy with them. The lenses I use the most are the 50mm and the 90mm. No problems with the 90mm. Furthermore: it is easy to focus keeping both eyes open, which is very helpful in the streets. And it is the only camera I can do it with. How exactly do you load the film? You switch the little lever in front of the camera to enable the film to be wound back, you wind the film back into the canister by pulling the film rewinding knob up and turning it for a while until you feel the film come loose. Then you remove the bottom plate of the camera completely and put it in your pocket. By turning the camera back into normal upright position you make the used roll to come out onto your hand. Then you pull the empty take up spool out from the camera (it will never come out and fall down to the floor by itself). Now you insert the leader of the new roll under the spring tongue of the take up spool and put both the new roll and take up spool back into the camera body, getting sure that the holes of the film actually got engaged with the teeth of the film transport mechanism, close the back door and replace the bottom plate. Much longer and complex to explain than to actually do it. In short: just do as clearly drawn on the camera right in front of your eyes and you will have no problems. Why did they modify the famous range finder? According to what I have read, they did so in order to make room for the light meter. My M3s were born on 1957 and 1959, have never undergone maintenance other than normal cleaning and work very well. I take them almost everywhere I go and most of the time I carry them just in my hands, without bag, case, nothing but the strap ("snake" chain in the older, doble stroke, one). If not in use, they just hang from my left shoulder right in front and half hidden under my arm at elbow height. I recognize I'm biased to the M3 side but I think it is because of solid reasons arising from their many qualities. Excuse the lenght, Jackson, along with my English... Best regards

- Iván

-- Iván Barrientos (ingenieria@simltda.tie.cl), June 23, 2001.

Depends. If you like in camera meters, it's the M6. If you need faster loading, again, the M6. If you want the best viewfinder, the M3.

Leica M Cameras are superbly built, and the older ones can still be serviced. An M3 with a compentently done cleaning and lube is every bit as good as a new M6, some (Sherry Krauter) say better.

Personally, I've cast my vote with the M3.

-- Tom Bryant (boffin@gis.net), June 23, 2001.

Just got back some very nice looking shots of children taken over the weekend with the M3 and 135mm Tele-Elmar. No problems with framing or focusing even with the longer 135mm lens, as even the 135mm box is large enough to work with confortably on an M3. Great bokeh on the 135 tele Elmar by the way. I love that M3! Thanks to this site for reminding me to use my old M3 more often.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), June 25, 2001.

Jackson, just two my copekcs:

Effective Base Length (EBL):

1) M3’s: 69.25 X 0.96 = 66.48 mm

2) M6’s (0.85): 69.25 X 0.85 = 58.86 mm

So, the difference is significant (7.62 mm) for accurate focussing with 90 and 135 mm lens.

Best choise to you,

Victor

-- Victor Randin (ved@enran.com.ua), June 26, 2001.

You got me Victor!!

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), June 26, 2001.