Re: [Leica] M Durability

["James Harrison" <leicajh@hotmail.com>]

Are you saying Leica laid the entire quality control staff off, and now have 
none?  jh

>From: "Don" <don.ro@verizon.net>
 >
>The brand new M-6 I bought had a defective pressure plate and it was
>discovered Leica had laid off the quality control staff and this kind of
>stuff flew right on through to the customer.
>
>No, I do not subscribe to the theory that the M-6 is a better made
>camera than the M-3's.
>
>Don Rorschach
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
>To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 3:59 PM
>Subject: RE: [Leica] M Durability
>
>
> > It's pretty simple, Bob, not that you and I will ever agree - With
> > incredibly rare exception - and I can't think of such an exception off
>hand,
> > but I'm sure one exists - a 40 to 50 year old USED mechanical device
>is not
> > going to be as the latest well built version of the same device.
>Better
> > build quality? Sure, from an engineering standpoint. But the M6 is a
>damn
> > well built camera. We're not talking Leicas and Brownies here.
> >
> > So enjoy your M3 - it's a truly wonderful 1950s machine.
> >
> > B. D.
> >
> > And I know the rangefinders don't fall out, Bob, but they do become
>harder
> > and harder to use. And the shutter mechanism CAN go out in an instant.
>And,
> > sure, one should have backup bodies.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of BOB
>KRAMER
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 1:40 PM
> > To: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us'
> > Subject: RE: [Leica] M Durability
> >
> >
> > B.D., How do you really *know* that the M3 is less reliable than the
>M6?
> > Unless you can offer some type validation for this view, I imagine
>this is
> > more of a  guess on your part then actual knowledge.  If we were
>talking
> > automobiles, I would agree with you, but a camera doesn't have near
>the
> > moving parts or wear and tear that a car does.
> >
> > So pick your poison, I say.  An older but better built camera, or a
>newer
> > camera without the classic build quality.  One thing is for sure.  One
>would
> > be smart to carry two bodies regardless of the manufacture date if you
>are
> > on a paid assignment.
> >
> > BTW, the mirror separation is a gradual condition that happens over
>many
> > years.  Its not like the prism falls out of the camera or anything.
> >
> > BK
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: B. D. Colen [mailto:bdcolen@earthlink.net]
> > Subject: RE: [Leica] M Durability
> >
> >
> > More power to you, Mark - But old cameras do die, just like old cars
>die,
> > old home appliances die, and old people die - no matter how well
>they're
> > maintained. In the case of Ms, the finders go belly up - and, if one
> > believes Sherry Krauter, cannot be reliably repaired when they do
>(although
> > they can be replaced with a more modern rangefinder) - and the shutter
> > curtain roller mechanism goes.
> >
> > But again, its a matter of what you're personally comfortable with. I
> > certainly know that when I'm on a job something can go wrong with one
>of my
> > M6s, but I know that that is less likely to happen if I am using a
> > relatively new M6 than it is if I am using an M3 from 1954 - it's just
>a sad
> > fact of life.
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, see
>http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, see
>http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
> >
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html




James A. Harrison II
KD5LMX
Wichita Falls, Texas, USA


_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html