Quote Originally Posted by mrosenlof View Post
Both of these cameras would be old enough that the individual copies you may be looking at are going to determine which has a better viewfinder.
Some are going to need strip and optics cleaned internally as they can mist from lube outgassing, Some are going to need 'resilvering' as thesplitter and front surface mirrors may be damaged from atmospheric contaminants.

You need to pay for either....
Quote Originally Posted by mrosenlof View Post
The M-3 was a major leap forward in modern camera features. It basically convinced the Japanese makers, Nikon more than Canon at first, to build SLRs to compete. The M series Leicas had enough patent protection that other rangefinder manufacturers just couldn't compete.
Canon made near Barnack copies until the Canon VI and P the 'near' copies did not sell in volume, Canon was a 'cottage industry'. The Canon P sold in volume 100k from 59 to 61, a P was a lot cheaper then a M2, cause Canon built it for production assembly, Leica remained a cottage manufacturer note the up market 'pro' VI did not sell as well as the P. Canon saw a market and went to simple popular cameras as well as 'prosumer' models, they became a giant supplier.
The Nikon S3 and SP models were pro cameras and competed with M3 and M2, Leica were not able to make a popular SLR system to compete the Nikon F and follow on F2,... Leica were also not able to compete with Canon SLRs. Zeiss did not do so well either.
Leica did not go to production assembly until the M4-2... they were lucky to survive.

Noel