Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/09/20

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

Subject: Re: M4-2
From: Stephen Gandy <>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 09:28:26 -0700
References: <>

Eric Welch wrote:
> >I expressed the former viewpoint (collector disdain) by some guy who said
> >every M4-2 he'd encountered was junk.
> Such snobbery only shows the person for what he truly is, a fool.

Its interesting to me how frequently Leica collectors and users
misunderstand each other.   Both are coming from very different place
with different motives--yet they each combine to make Leica a success.

Collectors generally agree that the M4 was the last well made Leica M
with the Leica's traditional craftsmanship.   M4's in the same condition
usually sell for more than M6's due to collector's interest.

The M4-2 is seen by users as an improvement on the M4 by users with its
hot shoe and motor capability, but as the first of the cheapened bodies
by collectors.  Specifically, collectors object to the increased use of
stampings and plastic, the lack of an engraved top plate, and what is
perceived by many as a slightly lower standard of finish.   Whether this
is true or not, of course, just depends upon the eye of the beholder.   
Since about 90% of the Leica rangefinder sales are to collectors(at
least in my experience), M4-2's often sell for half of what an M4 sells
for in the same condition.

Whose right?  Both.  But I object to name calling as it clouds up the
issues and keep the collectors and users from understanding the other's

Stephen Gandy

In reply to: Message from Eric Welch <> (Re: M4-2)