Re: Leica Alternatives

[Marc James Small <msmall@roanoke.infi.net>]

At 11:11 AM 3/22/97 -0000, Erwin Puts wrote:

>Lipinski, author of the very famous book " Miniature and precision 
>cameras" has made a screw by screw analysis of the Contax and concluded 
>that its 'enormous mechanical complexity' makes it more susceptible to 
>wear and dust. The shutter is especially prone to failure and is a 
>'masterpiece of misplaced ingenuity'. Roger Hicks is even more negative: 
>"the fact that it (the Contax) works at all is a triumph of something". 
>The fact that the Contax uses 24 (!) gears in its slow speed regulation 
>is one such example. To drive 24 wheels you need strong springs, which 
>break down easier and whatever you may think of the beauty of a 24-gear 
>train it must be more prone to wear and tear. And Jason Schneider also 
>draws attention to the somewhat delicate nature of the Contax.

My copy of Lipinski is at the house, but I believe his comments are
directed at the Prewar Contax II and III.  The Postwar IIa uses a
completely redesigned shutter mechanism.

Neither Hicks nor Schneider are engineers and their evaluations are simply
seat-of-the-pants.  I have discussed their comments directly with both:
Hicks has almost no experience with the Contax in any form, and Schneider's
experience was limited to the preparation of his interesting three-part
Modern column in 1982.  Neither has the sort of experience that you have
had, Erwin, so, frankly, your comments carry a lot more weight.

I HAVE overhauled both Prewar and Postwar Contaxes and both TM and M
Leicas.  The Leica gear train is deathlessly tough, while the Contax
shutter mechanism is complex.  That is true.  But my difficulties have been
with other parts of the Leica (rangefinder, rewind knob, miscellaneous
small screws, &c).  In these areas, the Contax is a camera built from finer
materials to a higher standard than is the Leica.

Marc


msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!