Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/10/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The thought that the M3 was named '3' because it had 3 frame lines seems odd to me, it wasn't that much later that the M2 and M1 were introduced. The M2 still had 3 frame lines and the M1 had 2. My hunch is that it replicated the 'III' of the preceding series cameras but was updated to arabic numerals (from Roman) to coincide with the newer line. All III/3 cameras had speeds to 1/000th sec. and r/f coupling. Leitz merely created a sequential line-up following the introduction of the somewhat perversely named M2. But I think it would require a substantial break from the M body shape to neccesitate a new name, and that may well happen. Jem - -----Original Message----- From: AlastairF@bhs.grampianshealth.org.au [SMTP:AlastairF@bhs.grampianshealth.org.au] M cameras: One thing this discussion has not yet mentioned is the naming of any new Leica. Being a traditionalist by heart if not nature, I would like to remember that the first M was "3", and this was because it had 3 frame lines. That in itself was a big achievement, and if Stephen Gandy is to be believed, it remains one. The M6 has "6" framelines, and this is why to my mind, they have not changed the camera's identification with the introduction of the TTL and High mag versions. So if we are to have an M7, then one would presume another frame was needed. '24' perhaps, though that will only worsen rangefinder accuracy, something none of we Noctilux users would like, so I believe the new M series camera, when it arrives, will still be an M6, and something will be added to the name to announce its improved pedigree. What is the German for electronic shutter?