Thanks, Marc, for this most informative post. I for one learned a lot from it. +++++ On Tuesday, March 29, 2005, at 09:04 PM, Marc James Small wrote: > At 08:15 PM 3/29/05 -0500, Allen Zak wrote: > >> Could you elaborate on this, please. My recollection of the time I >> used an M4 was that, while lacking some of the M3 finesse, it was a >> capable and substantial camera. My impression of the M6 (I don't own >> one, my last was the M42) is that, light meter aside, it is not up to >> the fit and finish of the M4. >> >> Actually, my favorite Leicas were the IIIf and the IIIG, but they >> were pretty well mated to the 50mm lens and awkward with other focal >> lengths. > > There are two problems with the M4, mechanical design and quality > control. > > On the first, almost EVERYTHING in the M4's innards is adjustable. For > a regularly used camera, this means that something is always out of > whack. The M4-2 and M6, on the other hand, have most internal > components set as "go/no-go" so that there are no finicky adjustments > to get out of spec, just components which, when they finally wear > sufficiently, are replaced. That silky advance of an M3 or M4 is > caused by the use of bronze and brass gears; these lap themselves into > synch fairly rapidly. The M4-2 and M6 use steel gears which take > decades to achieve a like smoothness -- but these steel gears will > last roughly 50 times as long as the gears in the earlier cameras. > > Leicas through the M4 were intended for an annual service. In those > days, Leitz ran regular free courses for neighborhood camera store > repair guys. Leitz liked these annual visits, as it gave the store a > chance to sell the customer a new lens or accessory, while the camera > store appreciated the opportunity to stay connected to a potential > purchaser of film and processing. As camera stores began to leave the > repair business in the early 1970's, the philosophy changed, and so > the later cameras were designed to work reliably for a decade or so > between services. (This is not to say that there aren't M3's out there > which have gone many years without a service or that there aren't M6's > which are hangar queens, of course.) > > On the quality control, Leitz benefited by a German government tax > break which was granted to companies which employed disabled WWII > veterans. Leitz hired a bunch of these guys in the late 1940's, and > they were a wonderful workforce, being delighted to find work of any > sort and rapidly accustoming themselves to the demands of Leica > assembly work. The war veterans retired in the middle 1960's and there > were few left by 1968, so the M4's were assembled by a less-capable > and less-dedicated crew. Again, this is not to suggest that some > IIIf's were Monday Morning Specials or that some M4's weren't of > simply stunning quality, but, all in all, the dedication which > produced my M3 in 1958 was hard to find by, say, 1972. > > My Wetzlar M6 is the toughest Leica I own, and I have owned and still > own a shitload of these guys. > > Marc