Looking for the perfect mechanical SLR

[Radost]

Typical electronics failures are fairly easy to repair. Lots of chatter about ICs failing but they don’t normally fail. The vast majority of electrical failures are related to corrosion and mechanical fatigue. In the following example, both battery wires are severely corroded and one has broken off completely.

View attachment 280996

True. True.

 

[choiliefan]

Electronic cameras have mechanical components which need cleaning and lubrication.

 

[Radost]

The

Electronic cameras have mechanical components which need cleaning and lubrication.

most important timing part that constantly needs lubrications on mechanical cameras is not.

 

[RLangham]

Electronic cameras have mechanical components which need cleaning and lubrication.

See here I thought all those mechanical sounds were simulated for nostalgia purposes...

 

[Dismayed]

Purely mechanical or electronic is like arguing religion. True believers should buy whatever makes hem happy. Me? I'm agnostic - I own both electronic and mechanical cameras.

 

[Huss]

The myth of "OLDER IS BETTER" "THEY DONT MAKE IT LIKE THAT ANYMORE" is BullShit and has not a single grain of truth when it comes to technology and engineering.

Leica M series cameras had the best build quality from the M1, M2, M3, M4 until the M5. After the M5 Leica cheapened out on a bunch of components. My M-P (currently made and sold) had the film counter fail. DAG repaired it and went off about it. He said that Leica had replaced the decent parts which it used to use (M5 and prior) with cheap plastic components that fail. This was a failure that he sees often. He even mocked the term "Mechanical Precision" that Leica uses!

I mean I still love my M-P, but it's nice to know my M3s and M5 were indeed the pinnacles of mechanical precision.

 

[Kino]

Purely mechanical or electronic is like arguing religion. True believers should buy whatever makes hem happy. Me? I'm agnostic - I own both electronic and mechanical cameras.

+1
Use what you like; let others use what they like. Pretty simple...

 

[Radost]

Leica M series cameras had the best build quality from the M1, M2, M3, M4 until the M5. After the M5 Leica cheapened out on a bunch of components. My M-P (currently made and sold) had the film counter fail. DAG repaired it and went off about it. He said that Leica had replaced the decent parts which it used to use (M5 and prior) with cheap plastic components that fail. This was a failure that he sees often. He even mocked the term "Mechanical Precision" that Leica uses!

I mean I still love my M-P, but it's nice to know my M3s and M5 were indeed the pinnacles of mechanical precision.

And this is why thus electronic 21st century

Leica M series cameras had the best build quality from the M1, M2, M3, M4 until the M5. After the M5 Leica cheapened out on a bunch of components. My M-P (currently made and sold) had the film counter fail. DAG repaired it and went off about it. He said that Leica had replaced the decent parts which it used to use (M5 and prior) with cheap plastic components that fail. This was a failure that he sees often. He even mocked the term "Mechanical Precision" that Leica uses!

I mean I still love my M-P, but it's nice to know my M3s and M5 were indeed the pinnacles of mechanical precision.

If they made a cheaper electronic rangefinder and replace all those over engineered mechanical garbage it will be a lot better. The frame counter will never fail.
But seriously whoever make a modern CLE-like M-mount camera that is small and light can have my money money.

 

[Radost]

See here I thought all those mechanical sounds were simulated for nostalgia purposes...

I am not talking about the mechanical shutter. I am talking about the timing which is done by gears - a technology invented by the greeks in Alexandria in the third century B.C. Something that constantly needs lubrication.

 

[Paul Howell]

And this is why thus electronic 21st century


But seriously whoever make a modern CLE-like M-mount camera that is small and light can have my money money.

They did, used expensive

Konica, Hextar RF

The Konica Hexar RF is a rangefinder 35mm film camera introduced in 1999. It has a bayonet KM mount patterned after the Leica M. The camera's features include:

A long base length RF (68.5mm) with .6× VF magnification

• 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 75mm and 90mm framelines in the viewfinder (auto selected)
• Frameline preview lever
• An electronically controlled shutter with a top speed of 1/4000 and a top flash sync of 1/125s
• Center weighted metering
• Full manual exposure and aperture priority AE modes with an available AE lock.
• Standard cable release
• Standard hotshoe
• Motordrive with Single and Continuous (2.5 FPS) advance modes.
• End of roll auto rewind (mid roll override possible)
• Sturdy metal construction (titanium top and bottom plates) with a flat black finish and grippy covering material

 

[Huss]

And this is why thus electronic 21st century

If they made a cheaper electronic rangefinder and replace all those over engineered mechanical garbage it will be a lot better. The frame counter will never fail.
But seriously whoever make a modern CLE-like M-mount camera that is small and light can have my money money.

They did with the CLE - unreliable.
The Konica Hexar RF - unreliable.
The Zeiss Ikon ZM - the one I had was very unreliable (mechanically - didn't keep it long enough to see how the electronics would hold up).

So that over engineered mechanical garbage has proven to be better than the modern electronic versions. My M3s from the 1950s still work perfectly. I guess we know what the real garbage is

 

[Chan Tran]

Leica M series cameras had the best build quality from the M1, M2, M3, M4 until the M5. After the M5 Leica cheapened out on a bunch of components. My M-P (currently made and sold) had the film counter fail. DAG repaired it and went off about it. He said that Leica had replaced the decent parts which it used to use (M5 and prior) with cheap plastic components that fail. This was a failure that he sees often. He even mocked the term "Mechanical Precision" that Leica uses!

I mean I still love my M-P, but it's nice to know my M3s and M5 were indeed the pinnacles of mechanical precision.

Is there a Leica M1? I thought the M1 was an Olympus?

 

[Horatio]

Is there a Leica M1? I thought the M1 was an Olympus?

The M1 has no rangefinder.

 

[Radost]

They did, used expensive

Konica, Hextar RF

The Konica Hexar RF is a rangefinder 35mm film camera introduced in 1999. It has a bayonet KM mount patterned after the Leica M. The camera's features include:

A long base length RF (68.5mm) with .6× VF magnification

• 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 75mm and 90mm framelines in the viewfinder (auto selected)
• Frameline preview lever
• An electronically controlled shutter with a top speed of 1/4000 and a top flash sync of 1/125s
• Center weighted metering
• Full manual exposure and aperture priority AE modes with an available AE lock.
• Standard cable release
• Standard hotshoe
• Motordrive with Single and Continuous (2.5 FPS) advance modes.
• End of roll auto rewind (mid roll override possible)
• Sturdy metal construction (titanium top and bottom plates) with a flat black finish and grippy covering material

It is a lot bigger than CLE.

They did with the CLE - unreliable.
The Konica Hexar RF - unreliable.
The Zeiss Ikon ZM - the one I had was very unreliable (mechanically - didn't keep it long enough to see how the electronics would hold up).

So that over engineered mechanical garbage has proven to be better than the modern electronic versions. My M3s from the 1950s still work perfectly. I guess we know what the real garbage is

My CLE has been reliable for a very long time.
I adjust the RF once in a while.
I have a 100% working second body and just got a 3rd working camera for parts.
I am set.
I shoot 28mm F2.8 98% of the time and the CLE is the best camera in my opinion.
M3 needs a special viewfinder attachment for lenses wider than 35mm. useless camera for me.
Electronic, light, small.

I am not familiar with the ZEISS ZM and Konika HexarRF but I have heard good things about the VOightlander RXX cameras.

 

[Radost]

I have my CLE with a leather case in my pocket all the time. Can not do that with a leica,

Minolta CLE 380 grams 124.5 mm × 77.5 mm × 32 mm
Leica m3 580 grams 138 × 77 × 33.5 mm
No thanks

Honestly i would have loved the Minolta/Leica CL size and ergonomics if it wasn't a mechanical piece of shit and if it could focus correctly.

 

[Pioneer]

They did with the CLE - unreliable.
The Konica Hexar RF - unreliable.
The Zeiss Ikon ZM - the one I had was very unreliable (mechanically - didn't keep it long enough to see how the electronics would hold up).

So that over engineered mechanical garbage has proven to be better than the modern electronic versions. My M3s from the 1950s still work perfectly. I guess we know what the real garbage is

That camera is still working just fine Huss. Contrary to most expectations I expect that camera to outlive both of us.

The only problem I have ever had with the Zeiss Ikon ZM cameras since 2014 is with the focus which has been known to need adjustment occasionally.

However, everyone has their own preferences and yours obviously was not with the ZM.

To each his own.

 

[Huss]

Did you get the shutter cocking mechanism fixed Dan? A single stroke of the film advance lever often failed to cock the shutter. It required a second effort (albeit minimal).

 

[foc]

The only failing with my selection of mechanical and electronic cameras is...............me!

 

[Steve York]

I've had complete failures on both electronic and mechanical cameras. The failure on the electronic camera happened early on, almost 30 years ago, and pushed toward mechanical cameras. I prefer mechanical camera now anyway; it forces me to use my brain. Through experience, I know my exposures before any computer chip can tell me, and I focus faster w/o autofocus. It keeps things simple because there's less choice.

The amount of computerized design and precision manifacuring from the later part of the 90s early 2000s forward is unmatched by anything made before that.
The myth of "OLDER IS BETTER" "THEY DONT MAKE IT LIKE THAT ANYMORE" is BullShit and has not a single grain of truth ...

I still shoot a Zeiss Ikon rangefinder which is now approaching 100 years old. No camera from the 90's and 2000's will make it even have that time. In the circa 70's they switch from making cameras that can be repaired by adjustments to those repaired by just dropping in new parts, no adjustments allowed. A mechanical camera can keep chugging along, with service, long after electronic whiz bangs are dead for lack of parts. Fifty years from now, you'll still see M2's, M3's, F/F2's, ect., but not today's electronic rangefinder or SLR.

So in a sense, older is better, and it is true they don't make it like them anymore.

 

[Radost]

Fifty years from now there will be way more 21st century Canon, Nikon cameras still working. No problem with electronics or mechanical parts "THAT DONT NEED LUBRICATION or CLA".
Your M2/m3 will need adjusting and lubrications.

I deal with old cars a lot. They are all garbage engineering and break.
Yet I have been abusing a 2010 Audi A4 quatro for 11 years in 115F weather.
Take any old car and try to abuse it like that. It will simply break and die.

What would you do if you need a surgery? Do it now in 2021 or travel back to the 50s?

Old engineering is infirior, expansive and unrelible.

Here is a test I propose:
I get my Canon Elan 7Ne and you get any mechanical leica.
We start droping them than focus and shoot.
How much you want to bet my Canon will keep shooting and your fragile faberge egg Leica will start failing.

And then we can stop this nonesense " they dont make it like they use to" argument.

I've had complete failures on both electronic and mechanical cameras. The failure on the electronic camera happened early on, almost 30 years ago, and pushed toward mechanical cameras. I prefer mechanical camera now anyway; it forces me to use my brain. Through experience, I know my exposures before any computer chip can tell me, and I focus faster w/o autofocus. It keeps things simple because there's less choice.




I still shoot a Zeiss Ikon rangefinder which is now approaching 100 years old. No camera from the 90's and 2000's will make it even have that time. In the circa 70's they switch from making cameras that can be repaired by adjustments to those repaired by just dropping in new parts, no adjustments allowed. A mechanical camera can keep chugging along, with service, long after electronic whiz bangs are dead for lack of parts. Fifty years from now, you'll still see M2's, M3's, F/F2's, ect., but not today's electronic rangefinder or SLR.

So in a sense, older is better, and it is true they don't make it like them anymore.

 

[Radost]

Before computers:

 

[foc]

Before computers:

Can we see the after photo?

 

[choiliefan]

Looks like a picture out of Lockheed or Burgmaster (https://www.amazon.com/When-machine-stopped-cautionary-industrial/dp/0875842089).
Not a camera company.

 

[George Mann]

I deal with old cars a lot. They are all garbage engineering and break.

Someone needs to familiarize themselves with classic Mercedes automobiles!

 

[Huss]

Fifty years from now there will be way more 21st century Canon, Nikon cameras still working. No problem with electronics or mechanical parts "THAT DONT NEED LUBRICATION or CLA".
Your M2/m3 will need adjusting and lubrications.

I deal with old cars a lot. They are all garbage engineering and break.
Yet I have been abusing a 2010 Audi A4 quatro for 11 years in 115F weather.
Take any old car and try to abuse it like that. It will simply break and die.

What would you do if you need a surgery? Do it now in 2021 or travel back to the 50s?

Old engineering is infirior, expansive and unrelible.

Here is a test I propose:
I get my Canon Elan 7Ne and you get any mechanical leica.
We start droping them than focus and shoot.
How much you want to bet my Canon will keep shooting and your fragile faberge egg Leica will start failing.

And then we can stop this nonesense " they dont make it like they use to" argument.

Hmm, really sounds like you wish you had a Leica.

Because frankly, anyone who is happy with their gear wouldn't bother posting how much other gear sucks, and theirs is the best, unless there was an underlying issue just eating away at them.

I'm sorry you are not happy with what you have. I'm sure you will respond in the expected fashion.