Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/10/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi! There are some cheapening changes from M4 to M4-2 - like elimination of self timer, the frame counter and base of PC terminal - quite minor IMO and otherwise the cameras are alike. When testing the M4-2 PopPhoto (July 1980) reported the teething problems but I´m sure all the cameras that had those are properly adjusted by now. The article is just one man´s opinion and clearly he loves M4. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen - -----Alkuperäinen viesti----- Lähettäjä: John Collier <jbcollier@powersurfr.com> Vastaanottaja: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Päivä: 23. lokakuuta 2001 15:07 Aihe: Re: [Leica] Third Quarter Viewfinder >Hi Nathan, > >You are right to be cautious. I opened mine and one article was badly >contaminated and the issue was only saved by Tom and Henning's wonderful >article on 21mm lenses. Unfortunately Roy Moss's article on M4 cameras was >about the worst thing I have ever seen in a Leica magazine. I do not mind >people having personal favourites but to viciously slam other cameras is >annoying and immature. Initial teething problems in the M4 are glossed over* >while the M4-2 is raked over the coals for its initial production bugs. >H***, initial M4-2 production involved moving all the M manufacturing >equipment thousands of miles and training new staff. He then praises >(faintly) the M4-P! The M4-P is an identical camera off the same production >line as the M4-2. The only real difference is the frameline mask set. There >is a selective quote from Norm Goldberg slamming the M4-2 while I have an >article from 1980 where he says it is a great camera but the early ones need >to be adjusted properly. > >Once again the KS15-4/M2-R is given the credit as the camera for which rapid >loading was developed. Looking at production allocation dates and >prototypes, it is obvious that rapid loading was being developed for the M4 >and used in the KS15-4 not the other way around. > >Sorry about the rant but Leica "purists" who think it cannot be a Leica >unless it is made in Wetzlar drive me nuts. Now where the h*** did my >therapist's number get to... > >John Collier > >* Why there would be any at all is amazing as the camera is not that much >different from a M3 and the same production crew was used. > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html