Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/07/25

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Equipment question....
From: Shel Belinkoff <belinkoff@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:41:06 -0700
References: <200107252023.f6PKN6x02023@hermes.toad.net> <2695801743.20010725220229@web-options.com>

Bob Walkden wrote:
 
> It's my understanding that M3s whose serial # > 1,000,000 command a
> premium because the people in Wetzlar were by then fully trained and
> experienced in building them, and that consequently the M3s were better
> made than earlier ones.

IMO that's just myth.  It's hard to believe that the people making the
cameras from #900,000 to #1,000,000 were any less skillful than those
that were building the cameras after that.  I'd wager that many were
the same crew.  The only thing that differentiates those of the higher
serial numbers is their collectable status.

> However, given that all surviving M3s numbered below 1 million are now
> at least 41 years old, surely by now they've done enough to prove their
> build quality...?

My M3 is #96 .... (don't recall exactly)  It was made in the summer of
1959, which makes it 42 years old.  I'd say it's quality and
durability is as good as any higher numbered Leica.

If I were buying an M3 I'd want a later one, just to have all the
features, but I wouldn't buy it expecting that any particular serial
number is better built than another.  

- -- 
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:belinkoff@earthlink.net

Replies: Reply from "Gary Todoroff" <datamaster@humboldt1.com> ([Leica] Re: Equipment question....)
Reply from Marc James Small <msmall@roanoke.infi.net> (Re: [Leica] Re: Equipment question....)
In reply to: Message from "Steve LeHuray" <icommag@toad.net> (Re: [Leica] Equipment question....)
Message from Bob Walkden <bob@web-options.com> (Re[2]: [Leica] Equipment question....)