Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>[M3 or rapidwinder...?] Get an M3 and equip it with a rapidwinder ;) Seriously, though, the two let you do rather different things, so (as always) it depends upon your style of shooting and what you want to do. My experiences of using the M3 and rapidwinder are: M3: The M3 is wonderful for 50mm lenses. I have '50'-eyes, so most of the shots I see are in 50mm, which means that my M3 gets a fair amount of exersize. With the 50 mounted, you get only the one frameline (with nice, rounded corners to show you the outlines of a mounted Kodachrome slide ;) and near 1.0 magnification (it's actually 0.91x). If you shoot with both eyes open, it's fabulous, because you can see the action going on around the framed portion: it takes a little getting used to, but if you can shoot with your right eye to the VF, then it's like having a pair of framelines just hanging/floating around in your field of vision. Of course, the M3 is also good, by virtue of it's greater magnification, for lenses longer than 50mm: The higher magnification affects the effective length of the rangefinder, or something like that, which means that focussing with a 90/2.0 wide open (or similar critical situation) is easier. Then, there is the silky smooth feel of a 35yo, well looked-after M3. Rapidwinder: I'm currently using a rapidwinder on my M2 which Tom is exceedingly generously letting me borrow until the one I've ordered is completed. I've been using this for two or three weeks (time flies when your having fun, so I'm not quite sure ;) The RW is great for streetshooting. It's a style of photography that fascinates me a great deal, and the advantage of the RW is that it enables you to get two-three shots off in rapid succession. I haven't mastered the style or technique yet, but practicing at home I'm getting to the point where I can shoot without taking my eye from the VF and not jiggle the camera too much. I use an incident meter and preset exposure and zone focus. Then, with the RW, I can get two-three shots off of people on the streets here in Boston before anyone has noticed. This would not be possible without the RW. Another benefit of the RW is that it adds height and stability to the camera. With the RW lever down, the thumb of your left hand goes along the left side of the camera, the index finger rests on the focussing tab or lens barrel, and the remaining fingers of the left hand support the camera and wrap around the RW lever. Leaning the camera on the bones of your nose and eyebrow and gripping it firmly with the right hand, this results in an exceptionally stable platform for the camera to rest upon. I'm quite sure that this lets me shoot at one speed slower than normal, along with a little controlled breathing. Stability also becomes an issue when shooting with longer and heavier lenses: I don't own a 75/1.4 or any 135, so I cannot comment on those, but I do have a 1960's 90mm f/2 Summicron, which, by M-standards, is a pretty heafty piece of glass. Having the RW as an additional few ounces of counterweight to this when it's bolted onto the M2 results in better ergonomics. (Of course, having an M3, it gets used on that most of the time.) So, bottom line? It depends! ;) My dream camera would be an M3 with RW and 50mm f/1.4, and I'll get there some day. That would suit my style of photography exceptionally well. I hope that the information above (based on first-hand experience) can be of some use in helping you make a decision (feel free to email me privately otherwise, if I can supply more info). I guess the best thing would be if you can find either an M3, or a RW, or both, and try them out and see which suits your needs best. M. - -- Martin Howard | 2 + 2 = 5 for extremely large Visiting Scholar at MIT Media Lab | values of 2. email: mvh@media.mit.edu | www: http://mvhoward.i.am/ +---------------------------------------