Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/05/05

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] First M system choices...
From: Alfred Breull <>
Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 08:17:05 +0200

At 00:05 06.05.1998 -0400, you wrote:
>What would I be giving up (other than the meter) if I got an M3 instead
>of an M6HM?  It seems as though I could save a considerable amount of
>money on the camera and put it towards....
>     Lenses...  I'm thinking that a setup consisting of 35mm f2, 50mm
>f1.4, 75mm f1.4 (gulp!), and a 135mm of some description would be all I
>need.  I don't really think that I "need" the newest ASPH version of the
>35mm (but could possibly be convinced...), but what incarnation should I
>look for...or better yet, watch out for.  Ditto for the 50.  I'm not
>adversed to spending some money, but if I don't have to, that's just
>more I can spend on the 75mm...:-)  

There are some advantages and disadvantages:

The M3 has no frame for the 75 mm, and the later 35 mm lenses have 
no goggles, which you would need on the M3. Further, you see the 
(pretty fat) 50 mm frame all the time, additionally to the 90 or 
135 frame. An M2 (with rewind lever instead of the knob), which is 
the most basic M Leica in my mind, would be better. You'd have one 
frame only, could use the 35 without goggles, and would still have 
Leitz's original soft release button mechanism. But, you still would 
have to decide for the 90 instead of the 75. The M6-0.85 shows the 
75 mm frame (and has the pretty good lightmeter). The Hektor got 
sufficient to good descriptions, but the later Elmar or Elmarits
got better comments (the old 2.8/135 is with goggles). Further the
135 are not so expensive, in general, because it's an somehow
"unloved" focal length during the last 20, 30 years.


- --------------------------------------------------

Alfred Breull