Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] my camera should work for _me_ not t'other wayround....
From: Dan Cardish <dcardish@microtec.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 23:53:09 -0400
References: <B5781615.68C1%jbcollier@home.com>

I have heard that all pre-M4x models needed more maintenence, including M2
and M3.

Dan C.

At 09:23 PM 22-06-00 -0500, you wrote:
>John,
>I'm surprised to hear this.   So far as I know, the M4 was nearly as good as
>the M2/M3 (maybe the equal).   I suppose only someone like DAG or Sherry can
>say for certain how these cameras hold up but my discussions with one of
>them indicates that the M2/3/4 were the cream of the crop.
>Bud
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "John Collier" <jbcollier@home.com>
>To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 8:14 PM
>Subject: Re: [Leica] my camera should work for _me_ not t'other wayround....
>
>
>[Snip]
>>The M4
>> is too desirable to collectors and needs more regular maintenance (Under
>> heavy shooting) than a well sorted late M4-2 or -P.
>>
>> John Collier
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

Replies: Reply from "Bud Cook" <budcook@attglobal.net> (Re: [Leica] my camera should work for _me_ not t'other wayround....)
In reply to: Message from John Collier <jbcollier@home.com> (Re: [Leica] my camera should work for _me_ not t'other way round....)