Leica M6 finish bubbles / corrosion

[sr44]

I just received a bargain grade M6 classic from KEH, and was a little alarmed to find that the top plate finish appears to be bubbling up under the paint. After doing a little searching online, I discovered that this is a common issue with the zinc used in the M6, and seems to happen most often when the camera is stored in a bag case for long periods of time in humid environments. Other than this cosmetic issue, the rest of the camera doesn't appear to have any signs of use and works perfectly. According to the serial number, this is a newer model as far as M6 classics go, made in 1997. I did order a bargain grade one, as I expect to use this camera very often, and didn't expect anything collector worthy, but I'm a little disappointed after years of saving for a Leica to finally get one that suffers from such an ugly defect, as you can see from the images.

I'm stuck now with a question of whether to send the camera back to KEH and hope for a cleaner one, or just deal with the eyesore and keep telling myself that it's a user camera that's just a tool... though an expensive one that it certainly would be nice if it looked even remotely close to as nice as its cost would imply. I'm also a little concerned about what the other side of the top plate looks like, if there might be corroded metal bits just waiting to flake off into the inside of the camera some day.

On a side note, it seems to me like the rangefinder patch is ever so slightly not quite as sharp as the one in my Bessa-R, I'm wondering if anyone who has experience with both cameras could tell me if that sounds about right. I figured the two would focus about the same, but if anything I figured the Leica would seem somewhat nicer than the Voigtlander if I did notice any difference, not the other way around.

 

[Hatchetman]

By all means, send it back if you are not happy.

 

[sr44]

The camera is actually in far better condition than I was expecting in every way except the top plate corrosion. KEH's website doesn't currently show any other black .72x finder M6s in stock right now, so if I were to send it back I would have to get a refund and keep looking, or wait until they got another one in, which could take some time. At the very least, I'm looking at a couple weeks shipping time to send it and get another one back, when all I want to do is get this thing out and shoot with it. I'd also expect that any other "bargain grade" model I got would be much older and show heavier signs of use, possibly needing a CLA in the near future, whereas the one I have now appears to be pretty unused.

 

[snapguy]

weell...

If you are not happy, send it back. However, I think in the future you need to sort out in your mind if you want to save money or buy a perfect item. Pretty hard to get it both ways, but not impossible. Everything I have purchased from that vendor has been ten times better than I expected. And I have purchased items in their "UG" category. I think you have bought into the Leica legend and won't be happy without a perfect camera. That is okay, but expect to pay.

 

[Bill Burk]

If the surface ugliness belies a life of mistreatment, then you should send it back. But if it is only a surface defect...

Shoot film with it. Soon enough the tripod will fall over and ding the viewfinder (with no effect on operation)... In other words, looks are nothing... it's whether or not the camera has a long life of performance ahead of it that really matters.

Good luck... If you do send it back, entertain the idea of trading it in for an M2...

 

[summicron1]

that almost looks too uniform in size and evenly spread across the surface to be corrosion -- you sure you didn't accidentally get one of those hammertone bodies? Maybe, like light leaks in a Holga, this is a feature, not a flaw.

Seriously.

If it is a painted camera, not black chrome, the corrosion would be in uneven blobs, with areas still smooth and others where the paint had flaked off. This looks pretty even, almost intentional.

And if it is a flaw, and this is a painted camera, you want it to look beat up and worn anyway. That's the only reason to get paint instead of black chrome, which takes years to show any wear at all. My CL certainly took ages to show the zinc underneath.

May we ask what you paid? Paint cameras sell at a premium. Normal price -- $1,000 or so -- would indicate black chrome.

But seriously, if ur not happy, send it back.

 

[summicron1]

ps -- this discussion --

http://nemeng.com/leica/042b.shtml

down at the bottom makes me think it would be advisable, if that is corrosion (and it probably is) to send this camera back, since god only knows what it may look like in a few more years, but one guy took his camera out of the bag and it had a hole in it.

yike.

 

[sr44]

May we ask what you paid? Paint cameras sell at a premium. Normal price -- $1,000 or so -- would indicate black chrome.

It's definitely black chrome, not paint. I paid $1000. It's not that I'm unhappy with it, I just don't really know what to think. I was expecting a user example, with signs of wear. I didn't want a pristine one, as I intend to use the camera as much as possible. My biggest concern is that the bubbling will kill the resale value, or make it difficult to sell in the future since it's a defect as opposed to normal wear. Even though I have no plans to sell the camera, let's be honest, Leica gear is expensive, but the cost is largely offset by the perception that it will hold its value better than most photo gear.

 

[Pioneer]

I know it is tough to wait, especially when you now have one in your hand, but it certainly doesn't sound like this is something that will change in a good way over time. In 6 months it will still be ugly looking to you and you will still be worried about the resale value. Face it, corrosion, unlike brassing or other wear issues, doesn't get better. At best it just doesn't get worse. But, under that paint, it will be tough to know if it is getting worse.

Send it back and wait for another example. The other option would be too contact Sherry or Youxin and see what a new top plate would cost.

 

[Xmas]

If you want to take photos it is a camera.

Lots of the zinc M's do that the M6s seem to be the worst.

The finder image should be sharp but will white out.unless it has been upgraded.

I upset a chum an M6 user last Sunday he was watching me load a film into a M2 with the quick load kit. When I clipped the base plate back. He asked what are the other differences, so I asked him to fire the two blank frames.

The 2nd chum a M3 user told him not to.

So he fired two frames and asked why is it so smooth.

Brass gears 56 years of wear.

Anything post an M5 is not a real Leica. They even do d@&#%*§ ones...

Cruella de Vielle

 

[darkosaric]

Just use it. Leica with some cosmetic issues is far better than beautiful Leica that sits and do nothing. My M6 was almost perfect when I bought it, but now it looks worn out. But I like it in that way better.
Don't look for cosmetics - life flies like a wind - go out and make some photos !

 

[Vilk]

Don't look for cosmetics - life flies like a wind - go out and make some photos !

dang! made me jump up from the chair! i'm on my way...

 

[AgX]

that almost looks too uniform in size and evenly spread across the surface to be corrosion -- you sure you didn't accidentally get one of those hammertone bodies? Maybe, like light leaks in a Holga, this is a feature, not a flaw.

It's definitely black chrome, not paint.

What I see at the photo of the front looks to me exactly as those grain-effect varnishes.

(By the way: hammertone is different. It is a surface of tiny convex areas, also showing different tone at the edges of those crurvatures.)

 

[Terry Christian]

I'm with summicron1; I think this could be a feature, not a defect, especially since the same "bubbling" is on the sides of the shoe and on the advance lever. My CV Bessa R2 has a similar, if not identical texture. If it was a defect, I'd think it would be much more random. I'd Google large-sized pics of other such M6s before coming to a conclusion.

 

[Xmas]

No sale

The normal black chrome and silver chrome over zinc top plate is smooth finish.

A substantial % of early M6 had a spotty problem and my 95 silver chrome had spots on both top plate and back door where the top finish was forced up by corrosion from below.

They went to zinc some way through M4-2 production.

There is even a Ge word for it equivalent to 'Zinc-rot' without hyphen.

Eventually Leica went back to black paint over brass top plate for the MP, which is a 'real' M6, cept it can't use IXMOO, bit expensive though.

Most Leitz IIIc had a similar problem of silver chrome lifting off Brass.

 

[Hatchetman]

IMO the best reason to use a Leica is that they look cool. If you don't like the way it looks, I'd send it back. There's a camera out there that will make you happy.

 

[darkosaric]

Best reason to use Leica: simplicity and smoothies (it is like there is no camera - it is that good), reliability, great choice of lenses.

 

[Xmas]

IMO the best reason to use a Leica is that they look cool. If you don't like the way it looks, I'd send it back. There's a camera out there that will make you happy.

Nope a M2 shooter is cheap not that much more than a Canon P, unless you also account a P as a cool camera.

The M2 has a wind on lever that hits the end stop with almost no resistance real fast for a second shot short of a power winder. Even later M's are slick.

The P lever by comparison is like the turret of a T34 tank to drag round, though probably as good as other 35mm.

The P finder is better and easier to focus with kit /1.2 in available darkness!

You need sunglasses with either if you are used to SLRs.

The P rewind and reload is quicker, just like any SLR, many people can't do bottom loaders.

If you must have a meter a M6 or Canon 7 are more expensive.

If you only shoot people close in any are practical tools.

 

[Ian C]

The top plate appears to have a spatter finish. Many cameras and camera parts are finished this way.

My black body Nikon F3THP has a spatter finish that looks close to that seen on the front of the M6 about the view finder windows shown in the third photo. I believe that the part is first painted black, and later, spatters of thick paint are sprayed uniformly over the base paint.

My standard version Nikon F3HP black body’s top plate has the plain black finish and lacks the spatter finish. Some of my Cambo view cameras and lens boards have a black spatter finish as well.

In the first photo, the spatters on the top plate are beginning to wear due to accumulated rubbing. The shot of the front plate around the viewfinder windows shows the original spatter finish without wear.

I see no evidence of corrosion or any other type of deterioration, just years of accumulated friction wearing the tops of the spatters on the top surface of the top plate.

 

[Xmas]

But this is black chrome on zinc

http://nemeng.com/leica/042b.shtml

where the problem is discussed at length.

The acid test is the brass baseplate will be black chrome on brass and should be perfect.

 

[elekm]

If you had the inclination (and the money), you could send it to Leica and have them service it and get a quote on replacing the top deck. I might consider that route, if I owned that camera.

 

[John Koehrer]

It seems to have been a recognized fault in making the cameras.
Personally I'd opt for an M2 or M4 simply because I don't care for the black chrome or the finder on the M3.

 

[AgX]

And I learned all these years here at Apug that Leitz cameras were flawless...


If this actually is corrosion and that is actually a problem with the Leitz manufacture: Why not dissamble the respective parts, grind them yourself and hand them to a galvanic shop for a new black-chromatisation.
In case you do not trust that process, have the parts spray varnished.

 

[Xmas]

It is difficult to control the process that is why Leica had so many problems.

The went to zinc cause it was cheaper to make than brass but they recognized that the finish would be difficult eg they had to move the serial numbers to hot shoe.

Zinc is very reactive.

It was not the only problem they had with M6.

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

Shoot for $1000 you can just get a new zeiss ikon. I would send this one back, this corrosion will only get worse down the line.

+1 for the bessa r, it's one of my favorite cameras, I grab it many times over the ikon and canon vit especially when shooting in some sketchy areas.