[Leica] Re: Leica M questions

[Mitch Zeissler <zeissler@wt.infi.net>]

Thank you all for the kind welcome!  It was unexpected and very gratifying.

I had no idea my questions would generate such a large number of responses, and
I must admit, I breathed a huge sigh of relief when everyone indicated the gear
still had legs.  However, your responses have opened up some new avenues to
explore, if you don't mind. ;-)


> Welcome Mitch. Be prepared to sell all your other gear as the dreaded
> "Leicaitis" can be costly!  :)

(Father, I have sinned...  I have lusted after an M series range finder with a
Noctilux lens for about 20 years and now can feel it in my grasp!  Is there any
cure? ;-)

I have always been acutely aware of the cost of a Leica kit and am already
scheming on how to liquidate some of my other assets to fund these babies.
Fortunately for me, my wife learned photography on this M3 while she was
growing up and is more understanding than most about the wretched affliction
that has begun to consume me.

As a bit of background, I had a large variety of box cameras (and a cheap view
camera) from the time I was six until high school when I purchased a Pentax
MX.  After graduating from four years of college with an art degree, I went pro
with some multi-image slide firms (E-6 processing on the premises), working
mostly with Nikon F3s, Canon SLRs, Forox and Marron-Carrel animation stands.
My last serious purchase was the first Canon EOS kit, which I eventually had to
sell for cash flow reasons.  Other than an Olympus Stylus (and my wife's SLR on
very rare occasions), I haven't used a decent 35mm in eleven years (I'm in the
information technology field now).  Having had access to the good stuff before,
I was not about to settle for anything less; I just couldn't justify the cost.

So when my father-in-law delivered the Leicas to me, I fell off my chair.


> >- With the issues I described above, what would be a rough guesstimate
> >for getting all the hardware in good working order?
>
> The dim rangefinder may be a problem. DAG and Stelton will resilver them (I
> think) but it is rather costly. Lens cleaning and overhaul is affordable.
> If the eyes on the 35 are clouded badly the repair may be uneconomical.

Whom or what is DAG?  And Stelton is with The Focal Point?  Dan Kreithen also
had some very positive things to say about Sherry Krauter as well (I saw
Stelton and Krauter mentioned on the LUG Leica answers page and a response from
the 35mm newsgroups recommended Stelton).

I take it everyone has had good results from working with these various
services?  When dealing with any (or all) of them, should I first send the gear
for an estimate?  How does one pursue the servicing angle?  I ask because I
once had an SLR serviced over a decade ago by someone in New York and it never
worked correctly after that.


> >- Can the vulcanite be replaced?
>
> Yes, but the original pattern is no longer available. The M3 can be covered
> with M6 Vulcanite.

Someone from the 35mm newsgroups recommended leather; another suggested
re-gluing the pieces or mixing carbon black and rubber cement to patch the
holes.  I would like to have the legitimate material and if the M6 vulcanite
(or whatever it may be marketed as) is available and will work, that's what I
would like to get.


> >- Can the M3 range finder be brought back up to factory specs?  I have
> >seen the RF on the M6 and am astounded by the clarity of the image; can
> >the M3 get back to that?
>
> The dim rangefinder may be a problem. DAG and Stelton will resilver them (I
> think) but it is rather costly. New M3 rangefinders are not available from
> Leica any more. You can have an M4-P rangefinder installed.

Would it be better to have an M4-P RF installed?  I am not familiar with them.
Two other responses from the 35mm newsgroups recommended installing an M6 VF as
well.

If it is not possible to restore the M3 back to its original specs by
resilvering, what other directions are available as an upgrade path?  I am not
a collector and these cameras would be used strictly for my pleasure; as such,
I have no problem with altering them (or at least the M3) to fit my needs.


> >- Does it make sense to put the money into getting them photo worthy?
> > Would it be better to just leave them as is and purchase a new M6?
> >
> This is a tough question. The M3 has some unique features that make it
> desirable, particularly the greater magnification viewfinder. The feel of a
> well-maintained M3 is also superior to the M6. (I use both as well as M2
> and M4) M3 bodies in working condition my be less costly that rangefinder
> resilvering.

If I can get the M3 up and running for less than the cost of a new M6 body,
I'll be happy.  At this point, I am focusing on the M3 and *not* the IIIf as
the piece to be refurbished.  I don't know what to do with the IIIf right now,
but will address that later down the road (several responses have indicated the
IIIf and Xenon combo may be better suited for a collector [however, whatever
decision is made will have to be blessed by my significant other, as there are
fond memories at stake here]).


> >- Leica M3 #751120 body in good mechanical condition (black vulcanite is
> >peeling in several places and the range finder is very dim).
>
> 1955 Should be a double stroke, without manual frame selector and with
> glass pressure plate. My wife has a similar one and loves it.

This one is just a little earlier; it does have the double stroke without the
manual frame selector, but does *not* have a glass pressure plate.  I
appreciate all of the dates you provided, Ken; they are correlating exactly
with what everyone else has indicated.


> >- Leitz 50 mm f1.5 Xenon #375943 (beyond filthy; lens may have light
> >scratches in the rear element).
>
> 1937 These are collectable. Will fetch several hundred even in poor
> condition. You might be able to trade it for a Summicron.

Several responses have indicated the same thing.  Just how collectable are we
talking here?  Should the lens be worked on at all?  Right now it appears as
though the black anti-reflective coating on the inside is flaking off, but the
marks I thought to be scratches were just lubricant streaks.  It also has the
original aluminum Leica logo lens cap on the front.  Other than the internal
flaking, the whole lens looks to be in good to very good condition.

+++++++++++++

Additional questions:

- - I discovered the Vivitar 2800 flash my father-in-law included in the kit is
toast.  What (if any) flash recommendations are there for the M3?  I am already
aware of the new Leica SF 20 flash and wonder if anyone has had an opportunity
to try it yet.  I'm more interested in available light work, especially when
(not if) I obtain the Noctilux.

- - The Alpex light meter he included is also DOA.  I have not used *any* meter
since the first digital Minolta came out over a decade ago; what is the
preferred make and model now?  Are there any preferences as to battery powered
or non-powered exposure meters?  Digital or analog?  Spot, incident or flash?
(I'm not looking to start a flame war here ;-)  I have a buddy trying to talk
me into the Sekonic L-508.

- - There is an included Leica-meter for the M3 (mounts on the hot shoe), which
appears to be somewhat functional, but I have no way of discovering how
accurate it may or may not be.

- - What associated gear do others find beneficial?  I am having to rebuild my
photography kit completely from scratch, have a bad back and must travel
light.  My intentions at present are to fit everything (M3 body, one or two
lenses, meter and film) into a small fanny or lumbar pack, use my walking stick
with camera attachment as a monopod when needed and have fun.  I have no
intention of carrying much more than that.

Thanks for all your assistance and good shooting!

/Mitch