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: ktw@hlwpk.att.com, leica-users
Subject: Re: Leica body materials
From: Darrell Raymond <drraymon@daisy.uwaterloo.ca>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 13:27:12 -0400

>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."  

  Probably. There were also some teething problems with early M4-2s,
apparently, because of the settling-in period after the original
machinery was moved from Wetzlar to Midland. 

>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.  

  Nonsense.  What about the M5 would make it "the best camera they made"? 
Certainly not its clunky meter.  Certainly not its violation of the classic
M proportions.  Certainly not the vertical hang from the shoulder strap.
Maybe he meant that it was the best camera for repairmen...

-Darrell.
Replied: 24 Jul 92 15:12