Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/01/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On 1/18/03 10:15 AM, "John Collier" <jbcollier@shaw.ca> wrote: > No problems here either with any of my new equipment except the > occasional operator induced knock. Passport paid for the vertical > alignment each time even though it was my daughter's butter fingers > that were the trouble. > > My used equipment has generally required one CLA just after purchase > with no troubles after that. The only exception being an M4-2 which > required multiple visits before finally being sorted out. > > John Collier > > On Friday, January 17, 2003, at 11:28 PM, Greg J. Lorenzo wrote: > >> Am I very much an exception and all alone in this regards or are there >> other list members who have not had such problems? > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html I have to say that I've had more trouble with R equipment than M. I had a new 19mm ROM lens that I finally dubbed "the lens from hell". Sent it back three times, then sold it. Same with the early R8 I had. No trouble with M equipment save for the loose aperture ring on the new 3E. I just came back from the beach shooting with the new 135 3.5. I can't say I find anything wrong with the build quality, it's superb. My 2¢ worth. _______________________________________ Michael Cahill Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054 www.michaelcahill.com mcahill2@comcast.net - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html