[Leica] to shoot or to collect

["yeunel-1" <elliot.yeung@pp.inet.fi>]

Hi all Luggers,

I bought my first Leica a month ago, IIIf with an Elmar 50/3.5.  I have been
shooting with it a lot actually. I have even got interested in the Russian
copies stuff, as they are pretty easy and cheap to get around here. And at
the same time I have been tempted very much of getting a M camera. As the
current market prices tell me, M2s, M4s and M6s are pretty much out of my
financial range. People have been telling me that a good M5 is hard to get
and those that have good light meter working can be pretty costly as well.
(To save money, some people have also told me to get some Russian Zorki 5 or
6 instead.) So I guess I am left with M3s and M4-2s. At ebay M3s are
plentiful and they also have some marked as 'user' that actually go for some
lower price. There has been one that has pretty lousily engarved ugly bottom
plate and a strip of leather on the back missing. The mechanism otherwise is
in perfect condition, as the seller describes. It definitely is not any
collector's stuff but my question is: would it be worth it to spend some US
200 for this instead of some that has decent cosmetics for some US 600? I
will be most of the time shooting with the camera rather than letting it
colelcting dust around. I am not really in any financial position yet to
collect stuff but the cosmetics shown in the pictures seem a bit scary!
Maybe the market has it that US 200 is pretty good for a 'user-friendly'
M3?!

Then there is the thing with M4-2s. I have listened to how much people talk
about it in contrast with the M4s. It really sounds like the M4-2s are
belong to a lower class, at least in terms of all the cosmetics matters.
Then again if I want to shoot with the camera seriously, would it be worth
it to pay some US 800 extra for a fabulous M4?

Regards,

Elliot