Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/07/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have sent the following to Ferdinand in response to his call for comments about user's experiences with the M6 and wonder if it strikes a chord with any other LUGers. I apologise for the length of the posting but, since I have lurked on the list without posting for about 7 months, I hope you will forgive me. I have bought three new M series Leicas. An M4-P in 1981, an M6 in 1987 and another M6 in 1995. On each occasion they were bought with the current 50/2 Summicron lens. In each case, with rigorous testing of the rangefinder accuracy, I found problems. Each would not accurately focus the lens at full aperture (f2). I used to test this by focussing on a narrow, easily focussed target object like a spotting paintbrush placed at right angles to a steel tape ruler extended out on the floor away from the camera. The camera was placed on a tripod above the end of the ruler and tilted 90 degrees for a "portrait" format photograph. When the camera was carefully focussed on the paintbrush at varying distances, you could see the actual depth of field on the ruler on the magnified negative and see its relationship to the position of the paintbrush. In each case at f2 the sharpest focus was offset from the paintbrush such that the paintbrush was not in the zone of sharp focus. The M4-P turned out to have an inaccurately set rangefinder adjustment (ie. the camera's rangefinder was incorrectly set). This was promptly fixed by the Leica service centre in Sydney. There were no problems with the lens. The 1987 M6 also would not focus accurately at full aperture. The problem in this case was the rangefinder cam on the lens being incorrectly set up. The lens had to go back to Wetzlar. It took 6 months for the lens to come back to Australia but they loaned me a Summilux in the meantime. The problem was fixed. In 1995, I thought it would be "third time lucky". Not! The lens, the current chrome version of the Summicron, also turned out to have an inaccurate cam. Back to Solms. Three month wait. It then focussed correctly but I did notice that they had slightly marred the chrome finish just forward of the focussing ring. Groan! I didn't pursue the matter any further. Other lenses that I have bought new and secondhand occasionally show this problem too. It seems to be less of a problem with wide angle lenses (because of their inherently greater depth of field) and in the more expensive short teles (75mm/f1.4, 90 mm/f2). Better quality control? I haven't had the chance to test out the 50 mm Summilux or Noctilux. Off course any lens that has had non-Leica service is also suspect. I have become cynical about Leica's quality control. This is the company that used to use the slogan "Leica means precision worldwide". Not many users would pick this fault unless they were regularly shooting wide open and critically examining their images. Experience with one owner, mint condition M3 and M2 cameras with intact original wax seals and their original accompanying standard lenses suggests that this problem may not have been so prevalent in the good old days. Common faults that occur in the M6 are meter failure, probably due to wear, corrosion or breakage of the electrical contacts underneath the shutter speed knob (the only moving parts in the meter system), and vertical misalignment of the two rangefinder images. The latter is very common in secondhand M6's to varying degrees and may be due to the delicate rangefinder mechanism being bumped out of alignment. Fortunately it is easy to get fixed. Having been burnt three times, I am reluctant to buy new Leica M6's any more. I prefer to save money and buy secondhand ones that I can check out fully before purchase with a range of lenses. Mind you, the problem is not limited to Leica. In the last two weeks I have tested two secondhand mint minus Contax G2 outfits in a similar fashion and found a 90 mm f2.8 Sonnar lens that was out of whack and a G2/35 mm Planar f2 combination that would not focus sharply at full aperture. In each case the lenses were inherently sharp but not where I wanted them to be. Despite not using Leicas at the moment, I wistfully lurk on the LUG list and enjoy the postings of current users of both R and M series equipment. I am currently shooting with a Hasselblad 203FE and a Mamiya 6. The latter is very much like an oversized M6 and has sharp lenses but a few develop vertical misalignment of the rangefinder images which, again, is easy to fix. Obsessively-compulsively, John Gilbert gilbertj@merlin.net.au Adelaide, South Australia