Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/01/18

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Gandy vs. Puts
From: DonjR43198@aol.com
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 19:26:16 EST

In a message dated 1/18/00 6:02:58 PM Central Standard Time, 
leicanikon@earthlink.net writes:

<< Right you are Mark.
 
 That's why your grandly built M6
 
 1) went through more than its share of film counter problems several years
 ago when Leica changed to plastic components to save costs
 2) why there are so many reports of unusually high M6 TTL battery consumption
 on the LUG
 3) why all the best repair people that I have talked to, who don't want to be
 named because they don't want to piss Leica off, are unanimous in the M6
 being a less well made camera.
 4) why the M6 's RF/VF has a flare problem which has been a topic of
 conversation for years on the LUG -- just check the archives.  It's cause is
 a change in the M rangefinder/viewfinder during the M4-2 run to lower
 production costs (parts were taken out)  -- and this was confirmed by the
 head of Repair at Solms
 
  >>
Stephen:

Your laundry list omitted the supreme manufacturing screwup of the last 
century and that is the poorly made and even more poorly inspected M-6 
pressure plates that scratched the film backing.  Solms really out did itself 
with that one.

I have yet to find any part of an M-6 that is better made than the M-3's and 
M-4's.  Like the plastic frame counter, most "new" manufacturing techniques 
only resulted in lower manufacturing costs benefiting Solms rather than 
making the camera more robust and reliable.