4 Reasons Why the Leica M2 is Better Than the M3

[Editor’s Note : Someone read this article and sent me a message that, in part, told me to kill myself. Pretty ridiculous, but I wanted to clarify that this tongue-in-cheek article is more of a silly conversation starter than a true examination into which Leica is best. And in any event, favoring any camera over another isn’t really grounds for death. Happy shooting, friends.]

The Leica M2 is just a simplified and cheapened version of the M3, right? Yeah, it’s a good camera, but if you’re going to buy a Leica M why not buy the best, why not buy the original? Right? Well what if we told you that there are valid reasons for using an M2 over its legendary predecessor? What if we told you that, today, the M3 is actually the worse of the two classic rangefinders, and that anyone looking to buy an M3 would be better served shopping for an M2?

With clear understanding that we’ve already sent half of you running for your pitchforks, hear us out. Both cameras are amazing, and a case can be made for each, but we honestly think at this moment the M2 is best. Here are four justifications for our heretical blaspheming. And no, I couldn’t come up with five. So what?

Reason #1 – The M3 is Ugly

Alright, it’s not ugly, but the M3 is a bit cluttered aesthetically speaking. The physical allure of the M rangefinder is in its no-nonsense, clinical approach to design. It’s a camera that’s sleek, clean, and streamlined. Except, the M3 kind of isn’t. It’s got bulges, ridges, and knobs all over the place. Did we not know better we’d assume Leica was the German word for “bezels”.

The M2, by contrast, is decidedly more refined. All optical windows are flush-mounted, and the raised ridge on the front of the M3 has been shaved away. This gives the M2 a more modern and contemporary design, and seems to adhere more closely to the Bauhaus aesthetic that’s surely at the heart of the M rangefinder’s design brief.

M2M3 front compare

We know some fans love the moldings surrounding nearly every feature of the camera, but we don’t. We feel they’re overwrought and add nothing to the overall aesthetic. Even worse, they actually detract from the whole.

We just can’t understand why Leica embellished their flagship camera with so many useless bits of metal. And those photophiles who are truly obsessed with simplicity can even search out an M2 with virtually nothing extraneous hanging off the front. It’s possible to get an M2 minus the frame line selector lever or self-timer lever, and with a surreptitious rewind button in place of the M3’s rewind lever. You can’t possibly find an M3 without that giant self-timer lever protruding from the front.

Are we picking nits here? Yeah, a little bit. But if you like concise design, the M2 is the best choice.

Reason #2 – Viewfinder Woes

This is the big one; the most important difference between the two cameras and the number one reason to shoot an M2 over an M3. It’s so important that we’ve nonsensically embedded it here in the very middle of the article. It’s the viewfinder.

Yep, the M2 has a better viewfinder than the M3. There, we said it, and we can already hear the raucous harangues over .92X magnification, 50mm focal length, and the prevailing opinion that the M3 is the best viewfinder in the history of the universe. But we’re going out on a limb and proclaiming that none of that matters, because the M3’s viewfinder is two-thirds useless.

It’s all in the frame lines. Both the M2 and M3 have automatically selected frame lines correlating to the focal length of the mounted lens. With both cameras, attach a 50mm lens and 50mm frame lines appear in the viewfinder. Or attach a 90mm lens and 90mm frame lines appear. But mount a 35mm lens and only one of these two Ms will show 35mm frame lines. Guess which?

clumsy goggle glasses

That’s right, the M2 is designed to work with the 35mm focal length without adding any extra weight, cumbersome accessory viewfinders, or shelling out humongous sacks of cash for specialized “goggle” lenses. If you want to shoot 35mm with an M3 you’ll be spending a lot of money, carrying extra weight, and losing viewfinder brightness. The alternative is to guess your framing and go for it, but that’s so… un-German.

Some will argue that the M3’s native 50mm, 90mm, and 135mm frame lines are a better set compared to the 35mm, 50mm, and 90mm found in the M2, but we disagree mightily. For our money, the frame lines found in the M2 are far more practical. 35mm and 50mm are among the most important focal lengths in all of photography, and having the choice to use one or the other is vital.

Not to mention that when shooting at 50mm with an M2 there’s the added benefit of extra viewfinder coverage. Shooting this way with an M2 allows one to look through the viewfinder and watch as subjects pass in and out of the image field. This is especially useful in street photography, or to easily scan the environment for elements that will work best with your composition.

Plus, when was the last time anyone shot an M with a 90 or 135mm lens? Honestly. That just never happens.*

*We acknowledge this is a highly subjective opinion, but you’re reading an opinion piece. What do you expect?

Reason #3 – Price

The Leica M2 was released as a simplified “budget” version of the M3, originally costing around $250 compared with the M3’s price of around $290. The well-known secret then being that while the M2 was marketed as a lesser M3, it really never was. Build quality is of the same impressive caliber as found in its more-respected brother. Cock the shutter and fire both cameras while wearing a blindfold and you won’t feel any difference.

So why does the M2 cost less than the M3? There are different opinions on this, but we’re chalking it up to reputation. Featured in everything from James Bond novels to Steve Jobs’ keynote presentations, virtually everyone’s heard of the legendary M3. When someone says “Leica”, people reflexively think “M3”.

Conversely there are many people who’ve simply never heard of the M2. And it’s human nature for many people to operate under the assumption that “if it were any good I would have heard of it.” So essentially, M2s cost less because less people know of them, and less people want them. Simple enough.

Leica M2 Vulcanite Replacement 1

While the price difference between an M3 and an M2 has shrunk since they were newly released machines, and continues to shrink these days, there are still substantial savings to be had by choosing an M2 over an M3. Often the difference in price today falls between $100 and $300, depending on condition and how lucky you may be. Look for a copy with worn vulcanite, replace it yourself with new leather, and you’ll save even more.

Just this past weekend we picked up an M2 for $400. Pretty amazing.

Reason #4 – It’s not an M3

To our earlier point, literally (figuratively) everyone’s heard of the M3. All the hipsters are shooting M3s, and that makes shooting an M3 lame. The M3 is so last year. Yawn. Who wants to be seen with the camera that everyone else is shooting? What’s up? You don’t have a mind of your own? You can’t make your own decisions? If you want to be cool, you’ll shoot an M2. Simple as that.

Owning an M2 shows you’re a smarter, more discerning, more specialized photographer. You know what’s truly hip. You’re likely better looking, have higher taste, know more things about stuff, and are better in bed than a comparable shooter with an M3. Obviously.


Well, we hope we’ve presented this with enough delicacy to avoid the pitchforks and flaming torches of the mob. If not, let us backpedal a bit. Is the M3 a bad camera? Of course not. It’s amazing. It’s one of the best machines ever made. It’s just that we think the M2 is marginally better and feel it deserves more recognition.

Do you agree? Disagree? Maybe you think the M6 is better than them both? Or maybe you think the M1 is all you really need! If that’s the case, let us hear about it in the comments. Just don’t tell me that everyone’s shooting Alpa now.

Want an M2?

Buy it on F-Stop Cameras

Buy it on eBay

Buy it on Amazon

Casual Photophile is on ElloFacebookInstagram, and Youtube

You Might Also Like

49 Comments

  • Reply
    Mark
    April 9, 2015 at 9:10 pm

    I almost agree with you, though the M2 is one I do not shoot: I currently use an M3/M4 combo. The M3 really is ugly – those window frames! Being a 50mm nut I prefer the M3 viewfinder and focusing a cron 90 at f/2 is much easier on the M3. Both are better than the M9 which has a really bad viewfinder. Ultimately though my favourite Leica is a 1934 Model F which goes to show it is all about the heart rather than the head (or the viewfinder).

    • Reply
      James
      April 10, 2015 at 11:01 pm

      Hey, the older the better in our opinion, and the III F is a beauty. No fault there.

  • Reply
    Ruben
    April 10, 2015 at 10:53 pm

    Shooting M3 single and duble stroke, M2 and M6 – (the M6 being almost vintage by now i can mention it) – I would agree with you except for 3 reasons – when shooting 50 mm the M3 is best, I love the double stroke action, and the film frame counter on the M2 is awful. The M6 is better then both the M3 and M2

    • Reply
      James
      April 10, 2015 at 11:03 pm

      You’ve definitely got some good points. While I don’t personally mind the frame counter on the M2, I admit it’s a much less elegant solution. Happy shooting, my friend!

  • Reply
    NATO
    April 11, 2015 at 1:19 am

    I too shoot an M6 and an M4-P(such an underrated camera) which is perfect for me since I shoot almost all wide angle lenses, the 28 frame lines are nice to have. I agree with most of what you said but I do have to go with the consensus on this, focusing a 50mm lens on an M3 does seem easier. If given the chance to a pick up an M2R though, I would gladly trade one of my current Leica bodies to get it.

  • Reply
    Travel and Fashion
    April 11, 2015 at 7:50 am

    Good points there, good Leica teaser and nice angle of view for the M2.
    M3 clearly is a good combo with the 50mm. If 35mm your points are clearly interesting. If you want to be super super cool shoot an MD with 28mm ( or more ) 😉

    • Reply
      James
      April 11, 2015 at 8:53 am

      Oh the CLE is definitely the coolest. 😉

  • Reply
    Jeremy Hicks
    April 11, 2015 at 8:13 am

    I agree completely, which is why I chose an M2 over an M3 when i got back into film about 6 months ago.

    The M3 is uglier and does not have 35mm lines.

    My choice to start shooting film again was about simplicity.

    The M2 is simpler than the M3. Ok I could live without the self timer and even he frame selector. But I like the simplicity of the frame counter.

    • Reply
      James
      April 11, 2015 at 8:54 am

      Glad you like it. Honestly it is all about personal preference, but that doesn’t make for very good articles, does it? Thanks for the comment, my friend.

      • Reply
        jeremyhicksphotography
        April 17, 2015 at 8:24 pm

        By way of strange coincidence I saw this article and the picture of the ‘blue M2’ the day after I recovered my M2 in a similar crinkle blue.

        • Reply
          James
          April 17, 2015 at 8:27 pm

          It’s a beautiful way to go. Shoot a blue M2 myself.

          • Andrew
            December 20, 2016 at 7:33 pm

            My M2 is covered in British Racing Green kid leather.

  • Reply
    edge100
    April 11, 2015 at 12:19 pm

    agreed.

    By the same arguments, though, the M4 is better than both the M3 and the M2. Better film loading, easier rewinding. Same frame lines as the M2, to boot.

    • Reply
      James
      April 11, 2015 at 12:54 pm

      Sounds like another article to be written. Thanks for writing in.

  • Reply
    whhs84
    April 11, 2015 at 4:08 pm

    M2-R is the best ever!

  • Reply
    Andrew
    April 11, 2015 at 4:27 pm

    No, no, no. The one M to rule them all is definitely the M5. Uncluttered 50mm frame line with metering circle. Uncluttered (sort of) 35mm frame line with 135mm frame line as metering area (no other use for that 135 frame). Uncluttered 90mm frame line.

    Most importantly though are the mechanical differences. Steeples shutter speeds with indicator in the viewfinder and selector that overhands the front. THE FASTEST and easiest film loading of any Leica rangefinder (far better than the M4 system still in use today). Largest and fastest rewind crank. And then the big one, TRUE SPOT METERING.

    Yeah, it looks different, but its aged well, and it was the last Leica with traditional hand assembly.

    Once you shoot with an M5, there is no going back.

    • Reply
      James
      April 11, 2015 at 4:54 pm

      We have a feeling the M5 is going to become more expensive as time goes on…

      • Reply
        Andrew
        April 11, 2015 at 5:03 pm

        Already has.

    • Reply
      okto
      January 23, 2017 at 3:46 pm

      But it’s huge and ugly. Part of the reason to own a Leica in 2017 is that it’s an aesthetically wonderful piece of equipment.

      • Reply
        Wilson Laidlaw
        January 23, 2017 at 5:47 pm

        …….and a CL does most things a M5 can do at half the weight and size. Hence why Leica sold over twice as many CL’s as they did M5’s. I have owned pretty much every Leica rangefinder other than an ur and an M5 but whereas I would like an ur, I think I would even prefer the stupid O replica I had briefly, than an M5.

  • Reply
    Kai
    April 12, 2015 at 1:36 am

    Agree! I choose the m2 because of the price.
    But doesn’t mean I don’t like the m3 or the other m cameras.
    All the film m cameras are the same to me because they all have the same function apart from some of them has built in light meter.
    Happy shooting!

    • Reply
      James
      April 12, 2015 at 1:38 am

      And happy shooting to you!

  • Reply
    Adam
    April 19, 2015 at 12:52 pm

    With each year, the number of gears on my bike gets less, can’t push a big front and a small back, so they have gone, and the number of lenses I carry goes down, I might as well super glue a 50mm to an M and be done with it, so when I found this M2/3 hybrid it kinda hit me in the sweet spots, an M2 with an M3 viewfinder/rangefinder, then leave a 50mm on it, and its a bit like an old racer bike turned into a single speed fixie. its here https://www.flickr.com/photos/77437968@N00/16821816220/

    • Reply
      James
      April 19, 2015 at 1:37 pm

      Very nice.

  • Reply
    I Hate Morons
    June 3, 2015 at 8:16 pm

    The are the most stupid reasons I’ve ever heard. M3 is ugly ? M3 is so last year ? M2 has better frame lines ? M3 is $40 more expensive. Who wrote these, a 6 year old ?

    • Reply
      James
      June 3, 2015 at 8:27 pm

      Thanks for your passionate comment my friend. To answer your question, I’m 7 and 3/4 years old.

  • Reply
    shortsandsweater
    July 3, 2015 at 4:30 am

    I would almost agree, except as a glasses wearer, the 35mm frame lines on the m2 are basically invisible, so I would need an external viewfinder anyway. Given that, I would much rather have the big lovely m3’s vf.

    As for aesthetics, bevels may not be ideal, but functionality is more important.

  • Reply
    DDA
    July 12, 2015 at 11:03 am

    The best Leica is the one you hold in your hand and use.

    I love the M2 – like the M3 – sold and regretted selling the M4’s and, I think about my M6 0.85 when I shoot with the mighty M7 in black.

    Overall I starting hating the M7 when the DX reader let me down. But as Leica repaired it for free, I forgave and select, if not any Leica in the hand, the M7.

    (and yes, the auto exposure is a blessing)

    • Reply
      Adam
      July 12, 2015 at 1:02 pm

      Obviously the M3 is better otherwise her Majesty the Queen would not own one. Liz ll the original tiara wearing magnum pro. I am standing to attention as I write this humming the national anthem. .. maybe not. I have two M2s, and a ‘bastard’ M2 with a M3 viewfinder and an M3. I tend to towards what in cycling terms is known as a fixie, a single geared bike, and wander about with just one lens. When young it was mostly a 35mm, as 50mm was for squares and aged uncles. If you were cool it had to be an M2, and a 35mm Now I am old my Uncle may have been right and its usually a 50mm, and if its a fast 50 , Noctilux or 1.2 Cannon, or a 1.1 MS Sonnetar , the M3 rangefinder really helps. Oh I had an M7 which I regard as the onset of Leica spread, its waistline was thicker than the preceding Ms , and what felt like a sports car in the hand edged towards limo. Think Jag XK 120 then 150, or Aston DB4 then DB6, The M7 was the beginning of Leica lardification, the M7 is just a tad fatter than an M6, the M8 a tad fatter than the M7, the M240 a tad fatter than the M9,and so it goes on. Which is why I have not bought a 240. I am hoping there is Dr in a white coat advising a product meeting in darkest Wetzlar on how he can fit a gastric band to the Leica 260……. Thus my goto film Leica in a hurry is an M3, as with a 50mm lens it has the least cluttered viewfinder. The most practical Leica for daily commuting, shopping, parking at the supermarket, is for me an M6. But I have just discovered the joys of the 111G which of course is just an obese Leica 1. But an M2 is great, but really if its aesthetics and cool you are after ‘stuff it’ get a Nikon SP.

  • Reply
    bradmaestas
    January 11, 2016 at 7:42 pm

    I agree it seems a bit infantile to reduce the comparison to such crude and simplistic terms. I think they’re both beautiful pieces of machinery. Each has their place in history and each has their sweet spot, the M3 with 50mm and the M2 with 35mm. A rigid Summicron 50 lives on my M3 but I actually use the M2 with a Zeiss 25/2.8 most of the time. An M6 0.85 gets all my modern glass (35/50/90 ASPH).

    • Reply
      James
      January 11, 2016 at 8:14 pm

      Happy shooting!

  • Reply
    Colin Templeton
    February 2, 2016 at 2:08 pm

    Nice article. I shoot an M2 myself, and love it. But I’m surprised nobody has mentioned the purpose of the window bevels. The top of the M2 might look a little less Bauhaus than the smooth (and cheaper to make) brass cap of the M2, but those bevels do a magnificent job of keeping fingers away from the windows. With the M3, Leica thought of absolutely everything. Nothing on that camera is a frivolity. Shoot with a flush-windowed M6, M7, or any digital M, and you’ll spend plenty of time wiping fingerprints from the windows.

    Best wishes,

    Colin

  • Reply
    Donato Chirulli
    March 3, 2016 at 10:26 pm

    In fact….. I’ve just bought a nice M2….. 😉

  • Reply
    Jordi Vollom
    June 7, 2016 at 7:28 am

    Very nice review of a legendary camera. I think they are all great and we can be proud to own any one of them. In fact, we should collect them all;-)

  • Reply
    Wilson Laidlaw
    October 12, 2016 at 8:35 am

    M4 every time. The best built of all M Leicas, just before the cost accounts/management consultants arrived, the end result of which was the cheaper to build M4-2. In effect the M4 is an improved M2 and I would agree with the M2 v M3 argument, as my favourite every day lens is a 35mm, either the very good but very heavy chrome/brass f1.4 Summilux ASPH or the far lighter black/alloy f2 Summicron ASPH. I have had my M4 from new in 1967, where the body was my 21st present. It is a very early one (the 47th production M4 1175047) and was bought from Lizars in Aberdeen, Scotland. It still works perfectly after its first CLA last year by Peter at CRR in Luton and also now looks like new again.

  • Reply
    David Murray
    October 27, 2016 at 6:19 pm

    When I bought my first M in 2007 after a legacy I bought a1955 Double-Stroke M3. I did my homework: by buying an M3 I was able to have and use four lenses – 35mm f2.8 ‘spectacles’ and 50mm f2.8 retractable, 90mm f2.8 and 135mm f4. Although the viewfinder does dim slightly when using the ‘spectacles’ 35, it is bright with the other three. Quite frankly, there’s a lot of crap talked about the Leica M series that you simply don’t get with the screwmount models or the Contax 1/2/3/2a/3a etc. To discuss whether an M2 is a better camera than an M3 is just piffle. My view is that if you prefer 35mm lenses then you have a good choice, either buy an M2 or follow my example. These are lovely old cameras, I derive a lot of pleasure using mine and I’ve bought quite a lot of contemporary accessories such as Leicameter MC, retractable 90mm f4 (could not resist that, its a work of art) hoods, filters, polariser, and I often find people will speak to me about the camera. Taking afternnon tea in the lounge of the Randolph Hotel in Oxford (Morse/Lewis etc) an elderly lady came across to tell me that her late husband always had Leicas and her son has it now. She had noticed my M3 and 50mm lens on the table. I would be nervous taking a current digital M at £5-6,000 out with me!

    • Reply
      Wilson Laidlaw
      January 12, 2017 at 3:19 am

      I disagree with David Murray that Contax owners talk less bull pucky than Leica owners. They are every bit as bad with endless discussions about whether the f2 or f1.5 5cm Sonnar is better and is the extra price demanded for the colour dial versions of the IIA and IIIA worthwhile plus loads of other minutiae.

      I am now enjoying telling folks that my Reid and Sigrist III is not a Leica but is even better, when they come up to tell me how their father/uncle/grandfather used to use a Leica.

      I have used my modern digital Leicas (M8, 9 240 and SL) all over the world without a single problem. Thieves are not knowledgable enough to know what an M is and the SL would slow them down as they ran away 🙂 It always amuses me when you see an M with the badge carefully taped over.

      If thieves want to steal Leicas, they will break into a shop, as they have done on a number of occasions recently in just the UK. I would like to insure my Leicas but because I live half the year in France, I have not found a company who will cover me for unlimited stays outside the UK at a price of less than £1500 per annum, so I just carry the risk myself. Over the last ten years I have saved more in premiums than a replacement M240 and Noctilux would cost, so I am ahead on the deal. I used to be an insurance underwriter, so that is a calculation I would typically make before buying any insurance.

      Wilson

  • Reply
    Jon
    January 11, 2017 at 8:13 pm

    I love to sit and admire my M3, but it is too minty to take outside and use. So I just bought an M2 that needs work, and thoroughly enjoyed this review.

  • Reply
    Robert Simpson
    February 9, 2017 at 12:17 pm

    I have the M2,3,5 and 6 and they are all equally good in their own ways, and each has its own distinctive character. The M3 is quite challenging, the M2 more amenable and the 5 and 6 more useable because of the metering, loading etc. Although the 5 is big and not as aesthically pleasing it is a very good camera to use. The metering is accurate and I prefer match needle to led. The shutter knob is a delight as it protrudes slightly so can easily be turned. I could go on, but the downside is that the 5 is much more difficult to have serviced and repaired with some parts such as the shutter brake failing causing the camera to become a nice paperweight. The others seem to be much easier to sort out when they need attention. I think the 6 is less well built than the others but it is still very good. All give me a lot of joy to handle and all produce equally good results provided that I recognise their different characters.

    Much as I love my Leicas I am not someone who thinks they are superior to every other make. They aren’t. In some ways they may be better, but in others not. I have friends who swear by a different make and I respect their choice and they mine. Those people who get very agitated when someone criticises Leica (or Nikon, Canon …..) really need to get a life. I love old Minoltas because that is where I started, but I have never been able to get on with Nikon or Canon although they have produced some great cameras. It’s just that I haven’t been able to get the best from them, but with Leicas and Minoltas I can. Each to their own and all the better for it. And I don’t see my Leicas as investments as some do. They are to be used so if I drop one then too bad – life goes on.
    You might want to have a look sometime at the Leicaflexes – brilliant in their own way with the original being a an example of premium engineering and an absolute monster to carry about, but a delight to use if a bit idiosyncratic. The SL and SL2 are also great cameras, though with less character, but my favourite Leica slr is the R5, often overlooked but accurate, easy to carry and cheap. The Minolta dna is evident, if considerably modified by Leica. Nikon and Canon (as well as Pentax, Oly etc) have more complete systems and make more sense but the Leica slrs hold their own when it comes to to use quality of output.
    Great site so keep up the good work.

    • Reply
      James - Founder/Editor
      February 9, 2017 at 12:57 pm

      Fantastic comment and lots of food for thought. I’ve been waiting for a nice Leicaflex to roll in.

      • Reply
        Wilson Laidlaw
        February 9, 2017 at 3:05 pm

        James, You better book into that weightlifting class for the Leicaflex. I think the only heavier SLR is the bulls-eye Contarex. We bought one for my father’s 60th birthday, with the 55mm f1.4 Planar and after his IIIA he found it very heavy.

        Wilson

        • Reply
          James - Founder/Editor
          February 9, 2017 at 3:41 pm

          Been getting soft anyway. It oughta help. ; )

          • Wilson Laidlaw
            February 9, 2017 at 5:53 pm

            I would bet in any case the Leicaflex is nothing like as heavy as the giant Graflex Combat Graphic KE-4, I have just bought along with the three lenses (2½”, 4″ and 8″, all Kodak) all the filters and flash and other accessories, in its original Halliburton aluminium case, called in army parlance, the KS-6 kit.

            This enormous, US army green rangefinder, is also known as “Gulliver’s Contax”, as one of the designers was ex-Zeiss and the shutter has some similarities with a Contax RF. It uses 70mm perforated film, which is not the easiest film to find but hopefully, Ilford will be doing a run of it in HP5 later this year. It takes 50 6 x 9cm images on one cassette. At the moment its clockwork auto-wind is jammed, I suspect either due to overwinding or someone firing off the shutter without film in the camera (a definite no-no). It is therefore going off to Alan Starkie at Cameraworks-UK, who made such a nice job of my Leica Model III and I(C) Standard cameras last month. I have even managed to find a copy of the original US Army field service manual for the camera, to go up to Alan with the camera.

          • James - Founder/Editor
            February 9, 2017 at 5:57 pm

            Hey I have chatted with Alan as well! Great guy and as good a camera repair and customization expert as you’ll ever find.

  • Reply
    Robert
    February 10, 2017 at 4:49 am

    James/Wilson, There are certainly heavier cameras than the Leicaflex but they tend to be a bit bigger. For its size it is a monster, but loveable nonetheless. THe LF is truly multipurpose as it hold you down in strong winds, saves you having to do workouts to keep fit, handy for knocking in nails or tent pegs,can safely despatch any mugger (nylon strap gives same momentum as leather but won’t break) and will still carry on shooting! Add the 135/2.8 (must bee one of the heaviest 135s) and it becomes a truly lethal weapon.

    Have you thought of reviewing the Rolleiflex tlr – another classic that engenders goodwill from strangers and produces great results if you recognise its limits.

    All the best, Robert

    Ps your Minolta reviews show what a great company it was – for too long ithe SRTs and XEs have been overlooked as true classics. And as for the XDs, electronic marvels but give me a nice mechanical SRT, noisy as they are.

    • Reply
      James - Founder/Editor
      February 10, 2017 at 7:12 am

      The Rolleiflex is coming soon. I just sent one to Josh (a long time contributor).

  • Reply
    Wilson Laidlaw
    February 10, 2017 at 7:37 am

    I have Daddy (120-3.5E Planar) Mummy (127- 4 x 4cm) and Baby (8 x 11mm MInox film) Rolleiflexes. I don’t use them a whole lot as I have never been a big fan of waist level finders and I don’t use them enough to reverse my mind, so that pan left equals pan right. The feature I do really like about them is the EV lock, so that if the light stays the same, shutter speed and aperture all move together. When I bought a new lightmeter a few years ago, I made sure I bought one that could read out in EV’s (Polaris 5º Spotmeter).

  • Reply
    Peter
    March 20, 2017 at 10:43 pm

    I own an M2, M3 and M6 TTL….there are reasons to shoot with all of them. I find all of them beautiful but beauty is in the eye of the beholder so it’s a personal choice.
    If I had to pick only one it would be the M6 TTL over both the M2 & M3 simply because it is the most versatile fully mechanical camera and it had a great light meter built in if you want to use it. The TTL also features the bigger shutter speed dial that is so much easier to use and it turns in the correct direction of the arrows on the built in light meter. M6 TTL is IMO the best mechanical camera that Leica has ever built and it’s absolutely beautiful but I’ll never sell my M2 & M3… 🙂

  • Leave a Reply

    Spread the love of cameras and photography.

    Facebook
    Facebook
    Instagram
    Follow by Email
    RSS