Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/03/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have owned a few Contaxes, but not really a lot, so I don't feel I am qualified to write about their reliablity. But I have owned a LOT of Leicas, Nikons and Canon Rangefinders, and what I have learned from experience flies in the face of conventional Leica Folklore. If these three products are used regularly and given a CLA (Clean Lubricate Adjust) every few years or so, each are very reliable dependable professional units. In this contax (eh excuse me, context), all of their performances are essentially identical. In other words, Leica's reputed reliability advantage doesn't really exist since all three work GREAT given these conditions. However if things really get tough, ie humidity/dirt/grim/rain, I was told by a Vietnam War Photographer that the Leicas jam a lot. That is why he shot with Nikon Rangefinders, which he found in those conditions to be more reliable than anything else--including the also available Nikon F. That photographer currently works for the LA Times, and I was lucky enough to be able to buy his wartime outfit. SELF DESTRUCT LENSES: Even with regular and careful maintenance, Leica Lenses of the 50's and 60's suffer from an incredible fogging problem like no other lenses ever. I am told the reason is that they used a whale oil lubricant which migrates to the glass. Once there, the residue facilitates fungus growth. Besides this problem, the collapsible 50 Summicrons have a front coating which is VERY soft and easily scratched with even the most careful cleaning. In other words, the excessively soft coating was defective the moment it left the factory. The other chrome lenses of this period also have soft coatings which are easily damaged, but not nearly so soft as the collapsible Summicron. Experienced buyers carry small flashlights with them to shine through the lenses to check for this notorious problem. Leica Lenses of the 70's and later largely don't suffer from these problems. In contrast, Nikon and Canon RF lenses of the 50's and 60's seldom have problems with fogging, fungus or scratches. Nikon lenses are usually perfectly clear after all of those years. For some reason, Canon RF lenses seem to be slightly behind Nikon in terms of scratches or fungus--but still far ahead of Leica lenses of the same period. SELF DESTRUCT SHUTTERS: Leica Screw Mount bodies have original shutter curtains which self destruct over a 30-40 year time span. The rubberized material cracks and must be replaced. The Nikon shutter material used in the early Ones was also very bad. The Nikon material continued to be poor--ie of contemporary Leica quality--through the Nikon S until the introduction of the S2 in 1954. From that time on, Nikon cloth shutter last and last without cracking. While Leica seems to have greatly improved their shutter materials with the advent of the M3, I have still had to replace a fair amount of M3 and M2 shutter curtains due to age cracks. In this context of extended time test, it is too soon to be sure If the M4 and later cameras have a more durable original curtain material in them the M3/M2. Canon and Nikon introduced metal shutter curtains in the late 50's for the ultimate in curtain durablity. Although very slightly quieter, the Leica M shutter curtains in even the latest M6 have no chance of lasting as long as the Nikon or Canon shutter curtains of the late 50's--given normal wear. SLEEPING LEICA RF SHUTTERS DIE, NIKON and CANON DON'T. If you store a Leica Screw Mount, a Leica M, a Canon RF and a Nikon RF under the same conditions for twenty years and then bring them out to the light of day, 90% of the Leicas will need shutter overhauls because the slow speeds will be inoperative and the high speeds will be badly off. The Leica lubricants congeal, and that is the end of it. In contrast, amazingly, the Nikon and Canon shutters work fine 90% of the time with the exception of the Nikon S of the early 50's. I know most of you will never try this "twenty year test," but I try it practically every week in buying older cameras. This has lead me to believe that in practice and over the long haul, that the Nikon and Canon RF, especially the Nikon, are more dependable and reliable than Leica RFs. Please keep in mind that my comments are restricted to durability--not other Leica strong points like optical quality or Viewfinder performance. Stephen Gandy