Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1995/07/13

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

Subject: Re: M5 an inferior Leica?
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 14:12:27 -0400

My first Leica was an M5, which I bought used in 1976. I bought a new 35 mm
Summilux at the same time for the now unbelievable price of $260. I, too, had
the feeling that this wasn't a "true" Leica because of its size, so I was
always on the lookout for a deal. I bought an M2 and three M3's, but the lack
of a meter bothered me. I had several (3 or 4) of the MR meters and they
never worked properly for me. Later, I traded in these M's for another M5. 

The only problems I ever had with the M5 was with the battery chamber. Both
cameras had to have it replaced. I never worried about the meter arm being
fragile, except I knew there were certain lenses (some 21 mm Super Angulons)
that couldn't be mounted on the camera because of the short distance from the
rear element to the film plane. I also had to have one of the M5's
viewfinders cleaned because of a fungus growth, but that can happen to any
camera in the South.

Recently, due mainly to my fear of not being able to find mercury batteries
for the M5 meter, I traded the two M5's and a small wad of cash for a new M6.
It is nice to have a new camera with the passport warranty, but I miss the
M5. It fit my hands better (I have large hands). I guess I'll get use to the
M6 with time. I did prefer the analog metering system of the M5. Also, the M5
meter seemed to read a smaller area, and it was easier to tell what the meter
was "seeing".

My wife has had a Minolta CLE for about 12 years now and loves it. It is
basically an improved Leica CL.
Replied: 13 Jul 95 22:59