Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/07/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Dennis: Thanks for the interesting and informative response. Was vulcanite used on the M6J? If not, do you know what was used? It just seems a shame that a beautiful black enamel camera should be covered in a mediocre material. The reason I ask is that my first M-camera was an M6. After all I'd heard and read, I was ecstatic when I got a little windfall with which to purchase one. I noticed in the store that it didn't feel "all that" for how much it cost, but I just figured it was cold feet, so I took the plunge. Three months later I returned it and went back to my Contax S2 (quite a gem I might add). That was two years ago. A few months ago I got a decent price on an M2, so I tried again. OH MY GOD!!! LOVE AT FIRST SIGHT. The opportunity to get a brass top-plate camera (will that add heft and the feeling of solidity M6's seem to lack relative to older M's?) with a quality covering and an internal meter is almost worth $3000. I'd sure be trying to find a way to finance one (although on a graduate student's income, it's no trivial proposition). Thanks again, Aaron > Aaron Ruby wrote: > <snip> >> As a newish LUGer and and even newer LHSA member, I wonder what the chances >> of having vulcanite used as a body covering rather than the usual >> 'cheapanite' normally used on the M6. It seems to me that a black enamel M6 >> with vulcanite would be an absolute dream for both collector and user alike >> and should not make production costs prohibitive. >> Dennis wrote: > > Chances are zero. The vulcanite process required special dies to hold > the vulcanite in place on the body under heat and pressure. I > understand the special equipment no longer exists. Leica is not likely > to pay to bring it back when I expect it costs more than the present > stick on material. >