[rollei_list] Re: Leica M4: OT
- From: "Ruben" <ruben@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 08:44:32 +0200
I have the pleasure (besides Rolleiflex - currently only an automat with 75
,35 tessar c. 1953 -) of using leicas - I would agree with you Marc that the
M6 is a wondefull camera and that it feels very tough! I also have a IIIf-
red dial with 3 beautifull minty lenses and while it in use is not up to the
Ms it is a very charming camera.
I recently got two M2 - one I keept with a 50 1,5 Summarit - and it is -
berhaps not as tough as the my M6 a very lovely camera - it is 40 years old
and in supe condition.
The other M2 was a real beater -you take my word on it - I put a link to the
autionsite were I am selling it were you can se the pictures - amazing
though - the rangefinder and all the mechanic parts exept the selftime -
worsk flawlessly even thoug it has been abused to the extent that it is
almost a crime - please tjeck out the pictures and tell me when you treated
a cemera like that!
Anyway - shootin mostly with my 35 mm summicron the viewfinder in the M2 and
in the M6 suits me better then the M3, and based on personal experience I
can recommende both the M2,M3 and M6 anytime - What MArc says aboyt the M4
troubles I would stay away from that
lovely cameras! Cheers Ruben
http://my.qxl.dk/accdb/viewItem.asp?IDI=17150163&ListingType=0&ListingSort=1&PageNum=1&Catg=21085
if the link does not work visit www.qxl.dk and search for leica M2
ps. if you should be able to read danish there is a funny piece of fiction
on how the camera got look like it does :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marc James Small" <msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 4:04 AM
Subject: [rollei_list] Leica M4: OT
> 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:
