[rollei_list] Leica M4: OT
- From: Marc James Small <msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 21:04:28 -0500
At 08:15 PM 3/29/05 -0500, Allen Zak wrote:
>
>Could you elaborate on this, please. My recollection of the time I=20
>used an M4 was that, while lacking some of the M3 finesse, it was a=20
>capable and substantial camera. My impression of the M6 (I don't own=20
>one, my last was the M42) is that, light meter aside, it is not up to=20
>the fit and finish of the M4.
>
>Actually, my favorite Leicas were the IIIf and the IIIG, but they were=20
>pretty well mated to the 50mm lens and awkward with other focal=20
>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
msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxx=20
Cha robh b=E0s fir gun ghr=E0s fir!
Other related posts: