Re: [Leica] Is M6 really any better than M3?

[Nathan Wajsman <nathan.wajsman@euronet.be>]

Mark,

I am a relative newbie here, so perhaps my experience can be of use to you. I
bought an M6 in early May. I had received a lot of advice from the LUG and from
the Photo Forum on Compuserve before buying, with some people arguing for a new
M6 and others recommending the M3 (or M4). In the end I went with the M6
because I wanted the built-in meter and because most of my pictures would be
with the 35mm lens. However, after some time I began lusting after an M3 also.
This was partly motivated by pure lust, partly by the desire to have the higher
magnification viewfinder for the longer lenses that the M3 provides, and
finally by the desire to have two M bodies, both for backup reasons and to have
one loaded with B&W and the other with slide film (that is the reason why I
have 2 SLRs). I was a bit apprehensive about using a camera with no built-in
meter, but I had a Seconic from my Hassy days, and a weekend in Amsterdam with
a fellow LUGger's borrowed M3 loaded with Velvia showed me that I could get
nice photos almost as easily with the M3 as with the M6. So now I am a happy
owner of both. The M3 is definitely easier to focus with the longer lenses; I
use it mostly with the 50mm, 75mm (along with the VIOOH finder) and 135mm
lenses.

In the end, if I could only have one body, it would certainly be the M6 (or
perhaps the M6HM). Incidentally, you could buy both on the second-hand market
for not much more than the cost of a new M6: I paid about $1600 for my M6 and
$800 for my M3, which I believe is only $400 more than the price of a new M6.

Happy shopping!

Nathan

Mark Walberg wrote:

> I'd like to get a Leica body one of these days (using Canon 7 and Konica
> IIIM and IIIA now).  I know everybody uses their cameras differently, but
> It would help me to hear why some LUGgers prefer the M6 to M3 (costing half
> as much).
>     I do love my Konicas, with their full 1.00 magnification finders, but
> alas, they don't open up to f1.0!
>     So, other than the M6 meter and the different frame lines in the
> viewfinder, what real advantages do users find in the M6 or M6HM  compared
> to an M3?  For example, is the rangefinder any easier to focus?
>   Another way of asking this is, What can you tell me that would convince
> me that I need to save up for twice as long?    I'd love to try them both
> out, but I don't have the opportunity.    Mark Walberg



- --
Nathan Wajsman
Overijse, Belgium

Photography page:  http://members.tripod.com/~belgiangator/index.html
Motorcycle page:  http://www.geocities.com/motorcity/downs/1704/index.html