RE: [Leica] Marshall's old M4

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Not to add fuel to any fires here, but I have a black Nikon F that dates
from about 1973 - I bought it quite used - and despite the fact that it has
obvious signs of hard use, the black finish has held up remarkably well with
only minor brassing in a few spots....On the other hand, my first M6 - which
is now only two years old - already has started zincing in a few
places....Lecia makes great cameras - but the company doesn't make great
finishes for those cameras....(and now I'll head for the asbestos bunker.. )

Oh, by the way, don't you really know the attraction of all that brassing on
the M4s? It makes the owner look every Sunday snapper look like he or she is
a Jim Marshall, or the equivalent...;-)
>
> Well, maybe you like the look of that camera, I have no
> problem with that,
> but it is not due to the M4 being a better built camera than
> succeeding
> models.  It is may possibly be due to the poor black finish
> of the M4 that
> allows it to wear off so easily that makes the camera look so
> attractive to
> so many people.  I doubt that Leitz had that in mind when
> they designed the
> M4.
>
> Dan C.
>
>  At 12:25 PM 18-10-99 -0700, Paul Chefurka wrote:
> >I pulled the image of JM's brassed-out M4 out of the Leica
> Brochure, and
> >converted it for use as my Windows wallpaper.  Now whenever
> I minimize all
> >my apps I'm reminded of how much shooting I'd like to be
> doing - enough to
> >make a camera look like that.  Count me as one of the number
> that loves that
> >beat-to-ratpoop look of a well-used black paint M...  And as
> I also think
> >that the M4 is the best-looking M ever built, I get palpitations just
> >looking at that photo.  Better'n old Farah Fawcett posters :-)
> >
>
>
> NO ARCHIVE
>
>
>
>