Leica M3 vs Leica M3

Sirius Glass · Aug 18, 2023

cerber0s said:
Thank you all for your advice! It turned out both cameras had been serviced, the store sent them away for a proper CLA before putting them up or sale. Standing there, it was a no-brainer, I went or the 1962 SS with the Elmar lens. The lens by the way looked surprisingly clean, just a few specks of dust.

First roll of film (10 frames) put through it. The first half came out great, the second not so much, they became gradually more and more out of focus. I guess I must have forgot to lock the lens after extending it. Lesson learned early...

Sample shot included (no, it's not my hat).

View attachment 346903 View attachment 346904 View attachment 346905

Enjoy!

Kodachromeguy · Aug 18, 2023

Nice choice! I think you did very well. The 50mm ƒ/2.8 Elmar is a superb lens if it is still clean inside. Many are still clean, but YYE (Massachusetts Leica repair) told me that many he has seen are hazy and permanently etched because of some chemical outgassing from the aperture. If you see any haze beginning to form, get it cleaned quickly. Also, I recommend the deep and protective ITOOY or 12580 Leitz hood. Take great pictures!

madNbad · Aug 18, 2023

Glad it was an easy decision! Have fun, take a lot of pictures and post a few!

Tomro · Apr 24, 2024

brbo said:
Because in Leicaland it's economical to pay more for same stuff?

I never tried the DS M3, but I have two Pen Fs and one of them is DS. I prefer the DS.

Anyway, I would still buy 1965 M3, but only because you can modify it (if not already) to focus closer than 0.9m-1m of the early M3.

Resurrecting this old thread: has anyone here on this forum tried to modify the M3 to focus down to 0.7m? I only found the 35mmc page with information on it, but nothing else.

guangong · Apr 24, 2024

When I bought my M3 in late ‘60s- early ‘70s, the single stroke was actually cheaper than the double stroke because of its higher serial number. Already collectors were inflating prices. According to my friends who worked in Leitz repair department, DS was considered superior in construction. My own M3 is still going strong.

brbo · Apr 24, 2024

Tomro said:
Resurrecting this old thread: has anyone here on this forum tried to modify the M3 to focus down to 0.7m? I only found the 35mmc page with information on it, but nothing else.

I did it on my M3. From what I remember (sadly, I don't have the M3 anymore), after modifying it would follow down to something like 0.8m, so not all the way down to 0.7m that most of the newer lenses were made for.

Tomro · Apr 24, 2024

Thanks @brbo for your reply! Did you use 2 pliers? I'm in the process of getting an M3, but would really like being able to focus down to nearly .7m

brbo · Apr 24, 2024

@Tomro, it's probably been 10 or more years since I did this so I'd rather not give you instructions on how to do it (properly). Since I even today don't have any small pliers let alone two of them... I probably just used a flat screwdriver to bend the arm that stops the roller from moving further out.

Tomro · Apr 24, 2024

Thanks again, brbo. Maybe someone can chime in who did it just recently

MattKing · Apr 24, 2024

Tomro said:
Thanks again, brbo. Maybe someone can chime in who did it just recently

It may be more effective if you started a separate thread to ask your question.

anthonym3 · Nov 9, 2025

Elmarc said:
The 1955 example will have the older speed sequence eg: 100 50 etc whereas the 1962 model will have the standard 60 125 if that bothers you.
Plus the Elmar 50 2.8 is particularly prone to haze as the aperture blades sit very close to the front element. Something worth checking.

Leica M3 vs Leica M3

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency