The myth of smoothness of leicas

[Radost]

I can hear what you are saying so no need to repeat. I just don't understand how a camera with even greater magnification and real 1:1 view (that is the most important thing to you) is then somehow less suitable for you. You mentioned accuracy, so I thought that this is more important for you (which would make sense if you were using really long lenses), but you then reiterated that it is in fact magnification that you value the most.

At this point I feel like I'm too dumb to understand what you are trying to tell me, so no need to waste time with me anymore...

Wide open fast 50 lenses need the extra accuracy as well. Especially when you focus on an eye.
Example:
I have a oled tv inside the wall.
The TV is 2-3 centimeters inside the wall. With my m3 50 sumilux I can focus between the 2 from 5-7 feet away. When I put the m2 I don't see it as well because everything is zoomed out.
this is because the viewfinder magnification gets me " closer to the subject.
With the Minolta CLE .58 it is impossible.
I do shoot wide open a lot.

I do feel it is a wise choice for you you to not waist your time with concepts and general non descriptive talk just to chime in.

 

[Hassasin]

You must not have spend time on photography forums. The ”silky smooth” wind is praised everywhere.

Because it is, so long as the camera was not used for unintended tasks

 

[Axelwik]

True about the accuracy. but small viewfinder sucks. ALso can not use M lenses on it

The small viewfinder, when freshly serviced and clean isn't bad. My iiic/f (c converted to an f) has the rangefinder and viewfinder windows very close together, so pretty easy to get used to. You can also mount a nice big clear viewfinder if you want.

I also have an M2, but for ultimate compactness and pocket carry the iiif with its collapsible Elmar is better. It's a nice tool for when I don't want to carry, or risk, the M2 such as when I go on motorcycle trips etc. The screw mount Leicas and their lenses are relatively cheap, and the quality is just as good. Also a little more rugged than the M cameras.

The M2 goes with me most of the time when traveling overseas such as a recent trip to Australia and Papua New Guinea. The iiif is more of a knock around camera that's easy to carry when photography isn't the primary objective.

 

[Radost]

The small viewfinder, when freshly serviced and clean isn't bad. My iiic/f (c converted to an f) has the rangefinder and viewfinder windows very close together, so pretty easy to get used to. You can also mount a nice big clear viewfinder if you want.

I also have an M2, but for ultimate compactness and pocket carry the iiif with its collapsible Elmar is better. It's a nice tool for when I don't want to carry, or risk, the M2 such as when I go on motorcycle trips etc. The screw mount Leicas and their lenses are relatively cheap, and the quality is just as good. Also a little more rugged than the M cameras.

The M2 goes with me most of the time when traveling overseas such as a recent trip to Australia and Papua New Guinea. The iiif is more of a knock around camera that's easy to carry when photography isn't the primary objective.

I have a IIIG 50mm F3.5 and like it. But the shutter loss tension and I did not tighten it. Now one of the shutter tape line is broken. It is too expansive to repair.
I love how small it is.

 

[Axelwik]

I have a IIIG 50mm F3.5 and like it. But the shutter loss tension and I did not tighten it. Now one of the shutter tape line is broken. It is too expansive to repair.
I love how small it is.

Yeah, 70+ year old cameras do need to be maintained and repaired. I bought my M2 in terrible shape with a bad shutter and sent it to KEH where they did a CLA and fixed the shutter at no additional charge. The camera is like new again. It's worth a few hundred bucks to get them repaired and maintain them.

 

[Pioneer]

Leica = the most frequently serviced camera known to man.

 

[GregY]

Leica = the most frequently serviced camera known to man.

not because it needs it.....

 

[Radost]

My old Leica R3 "minolta" is so freaking smooth.

 

[Radost]

maybe I will open the top and try to clean the winder mechanism with lighter fluid and put some lubrication myself.
Or maybe I will just sale it.
I never use it anyway.

 

[snusmumriken]

maybe I will open the top and try to clean the winder mechanism with lighter fluid and put some lubrication myself.
Or maybe I will just sale it.
I never use it anyway.

That won’t fix the broken tape. Better give it to me, and I will give it a new life.

 

[jeffreyg]

Around fifty years ago I was loaned a M4 that had only been used for one roll of film I used it off and on for ten years before the owner asked me to return it to him but that’s another story. I don’t recall its smoothness but I was younger and smoother then as well. I do recall it being quieter than my SLR.

 

[Pioneer]

not because it needs it.....

Oh I completely agree with you. But every time someone reads a post like this one that is telling everyone that their particular Leica should have the smoothest action of some type, and someone does not agree that their particular camera feels that wonderful, the first thing that is recommended is to send it off for service because something has to be wrong with it. It is being done in this very post and it's silly. Does your Leica work? If so, use it and enjoy it. If it doesn't work then send it for repair.

I am sure that I will now probably get a dozen people telling me that Leicas need regular tune ups to stay in good repair. If that is the case for your particular camera then so be it. I would never try to tell you how often to send your camera in for service. Mine never seemed to be that delicate.

 

[Radost]

That won’t fix the broken tape. Better give it to me, and I will give it a new life.

Follow the conversation. The broken line is for the IIIG.

 

[Axelwik]

Leica = the most frequently serviced camera known to man.

Every mechanical film camera needs periodic service. Maybe they're frequently serviced because they're worth keeping around?

How long do you drive your car without changing the oil and/or getting it serviced?

I'm sure it's the same with cameras; my watchmaker friend tells me that mechanical watches, if they're used or not used, require service every 5 years or so because lubricants dry out. Sure, a new Rolex or Omega will probably run 20-30 years without service, but if it's not serviced for that long everything wears out and becomes loose, requiring new bushings etc. Pay now or pay much more later.

 

[snusmumriken]

Follow the conversation. The broken line is for the IIIG.

Oh damn

 

[Pioneer]

Every mechanical film camera needs periodic service. Maybe they're frequently serviced because they're worth keeping around?

How long do you drive your car without changing the oil and/or getting it serviced?

I'm sure it's the same with cameras; my watchmaker friend tells me that mechanical watches, if they're used or not used, require service every 5 years or so because lubricants dry out. Sure, a new Rolex or Omega will probably run 20-30 years without service, but if it's not serviced for that long everything wears out and becomes loose, requiring new bushings etc. Pay now or pay much more later.

Sorry @Alexwik, a camera is not a car & has no parts that are reciprocating at high rpms. The last time I checked oil changes were not on the list of recommended service calls. You can certainly choose to send your camera to a technician for regular checkups if you want, but there many people who only send their cameras for service if it exhibits obvious problems. I currently own a Honeywell Pentax H1a that I have used regularly since I picked it up in 2013. Since it has been in my possession it has never been to anyone for service and yet it continues to be a very reliable camera. I suspect that at some point it will need some attention but it has shown no indication of any need for work so far. My k1000 worked from 1983 until just a couple of years ago before I sent it to Eric Hendrickson for any attention at all and that was because the shutter speeds were starting to slow down. He was able to bring it back to spec with no problems, at least none that he thought I needed to know about. I have also owned two Leica M3 and one M-A rangefinder cameras that were very reliable until the day I sold them and did not required no service at all during the several years that I owned them. It has always baffled me why everybody feels that Leica cameras, which are supposed to be the cream of the crop, seem to require continual mechanical attention in order to keep working. That is certainly not my own experience.

Obviously if you expect cameras to be checked regularly you probably don't want to buy anything from me. But I can certainly guarantee that my cameras are exercised regularly and work properly. That is the biggest reason I finally sold my Leicas. I really like them and they worked great but they were not getting used as often as I felt they should be. I have been working almost exclusively with my Contax II, Rolleiflex Automat and Pentax LX over the past year. I shoot a lot of film but even I don't shoot that much.

Again, if you wish to have your cameras checked regularly then don't let me stop you. They are your cameras, feel free to do what you find necessary.

 

[RezaLoghme]

Maybe the previous post is about preventive maintenance vs. "If it did not break, don't fix it".

Personally, I believe that complex and/or delicate machinery should be serviced regularly. I think that watches are probably most similar to cameras, and high-end watches, with a lot of functionalities shrunk into a small case, should be serviced no matter what.

Cameras that were quite expensive when they were released 30-40-50 years ago can now be bought for a fraction of their original price. Still, the complexity of their technology remains - very much like luxury cars from decades ago.

Some users might have anecdotal evidence that their camera "worked fine" without ever having seen a service technician. I think that consumable items such as seals/gaskets, and small and delicate things like the many cogs and wheels inside a mechanical camera, need to be looked after, and there is nothing wrong with that. I am looking after my own body and mind, so why not looking after a complex camera?

 

[Hassasin]

Leica = the most frequently serviced camera known to man.

By that measure Hasselblad is in a league of its own.

 

[snusmumriken]

I meant to pay attention to the film wind of my M6 yesterday, but I got engrossed in taking photos and forgot about it. So I guess it must have been smooth.

 

[Axelwik]

Sorry @Alexwik, a camera is not a car & has no parts that are reciprocating at high rpms. The last time I checked oil changes were not on the list of recommended service calls. You can certainly choose to send your camera to a technician for regular checkups if you want, but there many people who only send their cameras for service if it exhibits obvious problems. I currently own a Honeywell Pentax H1a that I have used regularly since I picked it up in 2013. Since it has been in my possession it has never been to anyone for service and yet it continues to be a very reliable camera. I suspect that at some point it will need some attention but it has shown no indication of any need for work so far. My k1000 worked from 1983 until just a couple of years ago before I sent it to Eric Hendrickson for any attention at all and that was because the shutter speeds were starting to slow down. He was able to bring it back to spec with no problems, at least none that he thought I needed to know about. I have also owned two Leica M3 and one M-A rangefinder cameras that were very reliable until the day I sold them and did not required no service at all during the several years that I owned them. It has always baffled me why everybody feels that Leica cameras, which are supposed to be the cream of the crop, seem to require continual mechanical attention in order to keep working. That is certainly not my own experience.

Obviously if you expect cameras to be checked regularly you probably don't want to buy anything from me. But I can certainly guarantee that my cameras are exercised regularly and work properly. That is the biggest reason I finally sold my Leicas. I really like them and they worked great but they were not getting used as often as I felt they should be. I have been working almost exclusively with my Contax II, Rolleiflex Automat and Pentax LX over the past year. I shoot a lot of film but even I don't shoot that much.

Again, if you wish to have your cameras checked regularly then don't let me stop you. They are your cameras, feel free to do what you find necessary.

Obviously you don't depend on your cameras for your profession. Things do wear out much faster if they're not serviced. Hobbyists don't see it as much because they don't use their equipment as much.

 

[Pioneer]

Obviously you don't depend on your cameras for your profession. Things do wear out much faster if they're not serviced. Hobbyists don't see it as much because they don't use their equipment as much.

You have a very good point. I have several cameras that I use regularly but none that I use to put bread on the table. I could very well have a different perspective if I were using those cameras commercially.

 

[Pioneer]

When buying cameras I learned that the used cameras that I picked up that had lived their last 20 years or so, forgotten in a box or a drawer until they were pulled out for an estate sale, needed far more service work than any of those cameras that I bought used from professional wedding or portrait photographers when digital photography became the big thing several years ago.

It was always the cameras that rarely or never got used that were in trouble, not the ones that got used every day. Maybe they were being serviced regularly but I kind of got the feeling that the term "service" meant "charging the batteries."

Another thing, I live and work around people who depend on their tools for their living every day. Most of those guys use things until they break, toss them out and replace them with new. Of course I don't think any of them own a nice, mechanical watch and they take pictures with their cell phone. Obviously we don't live around the same people.

 

[brian steinberger]

When buying cameras I learned that the used cameras that I picked up that had lived their last 20 years or so, forgotten in a box or a drawer until they were pulled out for an estate sale, needed far more service work than any of those cameras that I bought used from professional wedding or portrait photographers when digital photography became the big thing several years ago.

+1. This is why I try not to accumulate too many cameras. I’d rather them be in the hands of someone who will actually use them and enjoy them. I have backups of my favorite cameras and I use those every so often as well.

Use it or lose it!

 

[Axelwik]

When buying cameras I learned that the used cameras that I picked up that had lived their last 20 years or so, forgotten in a box or a drawer until they were pulled out for an estate sale, needed far more service work than any of those cameras that I bought used from professional wedding or portrait photographers when digital photography became the big thing several years ago.

It was always the cameras that rarely or never got used that were in trouble, not the ones that got used every day. Maybe they were being serviced regularly but I kind of got the feeling that the term "service" meant "charging the batteries."

Another thing, I live and work around people who depend on their tools for their living every day. Most of those guys use things until they break, toss them out and replace them with new. Of course I don't think any of them own a nice, mechanical watch and they take pictures with their cell phone. Obviously we don't live around the same people.

There's more than one mode of failure, and mechanical things like Leicas, Hasselblads, and fine watches were designed for periodic service. They're not throwaway tools.

 

[Jim Jones]

I used Leicas and several other 35mm brands from 1952 until switching to digital. Only once did I need repairs. A tripod leg collapsed while on a automobile roof platform, dumping the Leica head first into the ground. To return to the topic of smoothness, it was not important while actually making photographs, so I don't remember even once noticing a lack of smoothness in Leica's film advance.