Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/09/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search][...] At one point in time I owned a Canadian black-chrome M4-2/MR. I had picked the M4-2/MR up used but it looked good and sounded solid at the time. Over the first six months of use, I noticed the rangefinder image alignment was off, a mysterious light leak appeared and the shutter speeds at and below 1/8 were inaccurate if not exercised daily. This was my "knock about" body so I attributed all this to use and sent it to Leica NJ for a CLA. About three repeat trips later, the light leak was gone and the slow shutter speed reliability was a little better. Things were still not quite up to what I wanted in the camera and I was growing tired of shipping the camera to NJ. I tried a recommended independent Leica tech who had many years experience (including working for Leica). What I ended up with was spending a lot of time on the phone getting chapter and verse about how crappy the M4-2 (and all later models) were and how I'd be sending it back regularly to get it fixed or adjusted. I'd encountered this attitude numerous times and decided that the problem might have less to do with the camera than with the person slamming my M4-2, M4-P and M6. I don't know the details of materials, design and workmanship over the many models of M cameras, so I could be out to lunch. It was apparent that I wasn't going to get an unbiased opinion from this particular service tech. Ultimately I sold the M4-2. Lately I've noticed that certain models (Wetzlar versions with the red roundel (?) on the front) have gotten attention from collector's. I'd consider buying another one (non-collectable) if I could find a service person not predisposed to seeing it fail. - Kevin kburke@iterated.com