Re: [Leica] M4 M3 M2 M4-2 M4-P

[Bmceowen@aol.com]

In a message dated 6/23/00 6:33:01 AM, mdarnton@hotmail.com writes:

<< More seriously, I think it's interesting that the -2 and -P are always 
looked down on because of their cost-cutting "cheap" covering, flare-prone 
finders, and lack of a self-timer, but no one thinks to criticize the 
various M-6 versions for the same thing. Did the new LHSA model come with 
retro vulcanite, the old flare-free finder, a self-timer? If not, by those 
standards, it's a cheap camera, too, right?
 >>

I've noticed that same thing. Somehow the M6 is OK but the M4-2/P is not. Go 
figure. For my needs the M4-P/2 is the ideal choice for a shooter on a 
budget. They are affordable and yet have the "modern" M4 take-up spool plus a 
real hot shoe and easy winder capability if you so desire. How can you not 
like them? On the other hand I do appreciate that the M2/3/4 have a level of 
silky smooth precision that is somewhat lacking from the M4-P/2. At least 
that's the case with the bodies I own. My M3 (after CLA) is buttery smooth. 
One M4-P (also CLA'd) is less so. It's also louder (though I have another 
M4-p that is not so loud). Still, for a working camera you really can't beat 
the M4-P/2. It truly is the "Poor man's Leica" -- much more so than a used M2 
or M3, both of which often bring much more $.

Bob (recognizes a bargain when he sees one) McEowen