Leica M-A vs M2/3

[GregY]

Components nowadays are made to closer tolerances and harder materials, so should that be seen as a bad idea? I remember when the M4-P was released and people moaned about it's steel gears not feeling as smooth as an M3 with comments that Leica had lost their way or cheapened the product, but you could now use a motor drive on an M camera! Sometimes the rose tinted spectacles cause the baby to be thrown out with the bathwater.

Perhaps you could use a motor drive on it..... but the original leica winder M4-2 itself was a pulsing piece of junk. I don't think that every change is an advancement.

 

[GregY]

I've bought a number of Leica M cameras new over the years, but now at $5500 USD, I'd buy a the quinessential M2 every time. Maybe it needs a CLA...then for as fraction of the cost of an M-a, it's good for another 50 years.

 

[Nikon 2]

I've bought a number of Leica M cameras new over the years, but now at $5500 USD, I'd buy a the quinessential M2 every time. Maybe it needs a CLA...then for as fraction of the cost of an M-a, it's good for another 50 years.

Me 2…!

 

[Pioneer]

Everybody usually gets the camera they want, and keeps the one they like. I liked the M-A but I finally sold it this year. When I was shooting over 100 rolls per year for various projects it was really nice to have that reliability. Don't kid yourself, it is a VERY nice camera and is very reliable. I used it heavily without stop from when I bought it in 2014 to about a month ago and it never hiccupped even once. I liked my M6 as well but it wasn't as reliable as the M-A, requiring two trips to the shop for service.

Now I am retired and I prefer my Zeiss Ikon. It is not as reliable but it has other benefits. The viewfinder on the M-A is nice but my ZM is just one step better. The older my eyes get the more they appreciate that big, beautiful viewfinder.

 

[cliveh]

The Leica M2 is the Aston Martin DB4 of the camera world.

 

[Huss]

Perhaps you could use a motor drive on it..... but the original leica winder M4-2 itself was a pulsing piece of junk. I don't think that every change is an advancement.

The current Motor M is a piece of junk too. Just not as bad as the previous piece of junks.

 

[Huss]

I don't think Nikon Fs have ever hard brass gears. Always steel. So when Leica 'cheapened' things by switching to steel, it was more a design choice so they could now use motor winders.
Or not.

 

[madNbad]

I don't think Nikon Fs have ever hard brass gears. Always steel. So when Leica 'cheapened' things by switching to steel, it was more a design choice so they could now use motor winders.
Or not.

Leica’s switch to steel gears was in part to reduce manufacturing costs when production moved to Midland by making parts interchangeable instead of fitted to a particular body. The ability to attach a motor was also a consideration.

 

[250swb]

Perhaps you could use a motor drive on it..... but the original leica winder M4-2 itself was a pulsing piece of junk. I don't think that every change is an advancement.

Perhaps you are confusing the M4-2 Winder (14214) that overstressed the M4-2, with the 'Winder M' (14403) that was compatible with the M4-2 but was made ostensibly for the M4-P and onwards?

 

[GregY]

Perhaps you are confusing the M4-2 Winder (14214) that overstressed the M4-2, with the 'Winder M' (14403) that was compatible with the M4-2 but was made ostensibly for the M4-P and onwards?

Not really confusing the winders...neither were really brilliant. 2 fps isn't anything to write home about. But it was the M4-2 that was the first M made with steel gears. Neither the M4-2 nor the M4-P match the smoothness of the previously built M models....which i think was the observation of the OP.

 

[Huss]

I have the latest Winder M, and really don't like it. Unless your thing is having the shutter button kick back shaking the camera after every shot.

And Leica knows how to build motor drives - the motor drive for my R9 is just fantastic.

 

[Nikon 2]

I don't think Nikon Fs have ever hard brass gears. Always steel. So when Leica 'cheapened' things by switching to steel, it was more a design choice so they could now use motor winders.
Or not.

Isn't steel stronger than brass?
Nikon used motor winders a lot...!

 

[Huss]

Isn't steel stronger than brass?
Nikon used motor winders a lot...!

That's my point. For motor winder use - which was introduced w the M4-2/P, steel gears were needed.
Especially with the early winder which was quite brutal in action.

So that diagram that you posted that shows how things got cheaper because they introduced steel gears? Well, maybe to manufacture but not in use.

 

[250swb]

Not really confusing the winders...neither were really brilliant. 2 fps isn't anything to write home about. But it was the M4-2 that was the first M made with steel gears. Neither the M4-2 nor the M4-P match the smoothness of the previously built M models....which i think was the observation of the OP.

But in the prevailing opinion the superiority of smoothness obscures the facts. Steel gears allowed photographers to do more with the M camera than previously. Whether you like the motor winders or not is irrelevant, they aren't a great experience but if the cheque arrived in the post from selling pictures from a football game who back in the day cared? Money and usefulness trumps smoothness. This is a modern middle class amateur debate where smoothness is being artificially elevated without the counter argument for the advantages robustness. Why is smoothness now so valued and used as a grade for cameras? It's because nobody needs to earn any money from them and nobody uses them hard enough to worry about wear. And if I were doing the National Geographic adventure tour for the privileged middle classes up to the furthest reaches of the Amazon I would definitely take my M4-P and not my M2.

 

[GregY]

"And if I were doing the National Geographic adventure tour for the privileged middle classes up to the furthest reaches of the Amazon I would definitely take my M4-P and not my M2."

Don't hold your breath.... ;-)

 

[Huss]

But in the prevailing opinion the superiority of smoothness obscures the facts. Steel gears allowed photographers to do more with the M camera than previously. Whether you like the motor winders or not is irrelevant, they aren't a great experience but if the cheque arrived in the post from selling pictures from a football game who back in the day cared? Money and usefulness trumps smoothness. This is a modern middle class amateur debate where smoothness is being artificially elevated without the counter argument for the advantages robustness. Why is smoothness now so valued and used as a grade for cameras? It's because nobody needs to earn any money from them and nobody uses them hard enough to worry about wear. And if I were doing the National Geographic adventure tour for the privileged middle classes up to the furthest reaches of the Amazon I would definitely take my M4-P and not my M2.

Exactly.
Every Leica I’ve used has been smooth. It’s only when I compare them directly back to back that I can detect a slight difference. That I would not have noticed otherwise.

Discussions like this are just used to pass time and make people feel better about their purchases.

 

[GregY]

Exactly.
Every Leica I’ve used has been smooth. It’s only when I compare them directly back to back that I can detect a slight difference. That I would not have noticed otherwise.

Discussions like this are just used to pass time and make people feel better about their purchases.

Exactly.
Every Leica I’ve used has been smooth. It’s only when I compare them directly back to back that I can detect a slight difference. That I would not have noticed otherwise.

Discussions like this are just used to pass time and make people feel better about their purchases.

Huss, Isn't this true of many discussions here??

 

[Nikon 2]

Exactly.
Every Leica I’ve used has been smooth. It’s only when I compare them directly back to back that I can detect a slight difference. That I would not have noticed otherwise.

Discussions like this are just used to pass time and make people feel better about their purchases.

The truth shall set you free…!

 

[Huss]

I think the smoothest winding camera I’ve used was a Minolta XE-5.
One of the least smooth is my otherwise excellent Olympus Pen FT. Has a weirdly gritty feeling advance, and the couple I’ve tried as well as the one I own have been like that.

 

[Craig]

The Leica M2 is the Aston Martin DB4 of the camera world.

Does this quote from an Aston Martin Owner's club buyers guide apply to the M2 as well?
"Aston Martin owners need to accept a certain level of fally-apartness in these cars"

 

[GregY]

Does this quote from an Aston Martin Owner's club buyers guide apply to the M2 as well?
"Aston Martin owners need to accept a certain level of fally-apartness in these cars"

I don't think so, since there are many Leica M2 still on the road from there 1957-1968 production run.

 

[Huss]

The Leica M2 is the Aston Martin DB4 of the camera world.

If you mean the complete opposite, yes.

 

[cliveh]

If you mean the complete opposite, yes.

I don't follow, please explain?

 

[eli griggs]

That's my point. For motor winder use - which was introduced w the M4-2/P, steel gears were needed.
Especially with the early winder which was quite brutal in action.

So that diagram that you posted that shows how things got cheaper because they introduced steel gears? Well, maybe to manufacture but not in use.

Steel is stronger, but brass on steel is smoother, even unlubricated.

Doubt me, check out the adjustment screw on an old, clean iron Stanley or Record hand plane, brass wheel running on steel screw is the cats meow.

 

[Huss]

I don't follow, please explain?

The M2 is an extremely reliable, dependable camera, the pinnacle of quality after the M3. Back when it came and, and now in the present day.

An Aston Martin DB4? The opposite.