Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1992/07/22

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

To: leica-users
Subject: Re: Leica body materials
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 10:09 EDT
Original-From: hlwpk!ktw (Kenneth T Wolman +1 201 564 2866)

>The used camera salesman at my local photo store told me that with the M4-2,
>adequate but less expensive materials were used in the top plate and also in
>the innards. Was the Leica M4-2 seen as a less expensive Leica for the masses?
>I know that it does not have a movable film reminder dial on the back like
>my M2 has. Was the salesman correct?

I always thought the M2 had originally been engineered as the lower 
priced alternative (lower priced?!) to the M3.  I've talked to Leica 
dealers at swap shows who don't exactly disparage the M4-2, but don't 
rate it has high as the earlier cameras: some are not even 
particularly fond of the M4P and M6 in terms of materials.  I wonder 
if the fact the M4-2 was manufactured in Canada instead of Wetzlar has 
something to do with its lack of prestige or "mystique."  The person 
who overhauled my M3 told me that the M5, for all the raps it took 
about being heavy and "not looking like a Leica," was probably the 
best camera they made, or at least was on a par with the M4.  

Ken Wolman