Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/01/03

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] R: IIa or IIIa,:
From: "Robert Marvin" <marvbej@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2000 07:28:39 -0500

I've been using a IIIa on and off since I was in high school in 1960. I
bought it for $25 as a second body to supplement my Yashica YF and later
Canon VIT. Recently, after 30 years away from serious photography I started
using it again and its even nicer than I remember. The only problem was that
in addition to 1/1000 sec., which never worked, 1/500 has also stopped
working--slow speeds are still fine. (time for a CLA). I bought a IIIf to
serve as my main camera (should be more reliable--its ONLY about 45 years
old). The shutter on a IIIf is supposed to be smoother and quieter than on a
IIIA, but i haven't noticed any difference. The more widely spaced
viewfinder rangefinder windows on the IIIa might be a slight disadvantage
compared to the IIIf,but I use a Russian universal finder most of the
time--even for the 50.

In short, I highly recommend a IIIa as a 2nd Leica you can use without
worrying about.

Bob Marvin 

>From: <bruce5@attglobal.net>
>To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2000 8:18 PM
>Subject: [Leica] Contax RF & Durability Issues
>
>
>> Has anyone ever used a IIa or IIIa, or know of a reliable source for
>> purchasing?
>> From what I've been able to learn so far, it sounds like a nice camera
>> for the money, but I haven't spoken to anyone who actually uses one.
>>
>> Finally, would it be a good choice to carry in outdoor situations, like
>> cold weather camping, hiking, fishing, etc?  I like how easily I can
>> take the M anywhere, but due to the cost, I'm still a little too
>> protective of it in some situations.  Maybe when it gets its first
>> scratch, I'll relax, but in the meantime...
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Bruce