Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/01/16

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] M Durability
From: Bill Satterfield <cwsat@istate.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 07:46:21 -0600
References: <MBBBJHIBKCKEAEOKKBPOOEKDCDAA.bdcolen@earthlink.net> <01d801c19e1a$acb3fe20$8ca242cf@bayeramd>

Ted, you did not make a mistake. I am not  quitters old as you but old 
enough to realize you only go around once Dp whay yopu want to do when 
you do it. All of us have seen some OFs in  new Chevy Corvettes with a 
good looking younger woman in the right seat. Enjoy, life is good from 
alpha to omega.

Ted Bayer wrote:

>All this give and take about durability has me wondering if I made a
>mistake.
>
>I just ordered a "used but not ugly" M3 (#1072XXX) and am impatiently
>waiting for it to arrive.  Why did I buy it?  Because of past Leica
>experience, and all the good things I read on this and other lists a few
>weeks back about how durable the old M3s are -- and of course for the
>effective base length of the wonderful viewfinder.
>
>I'm one of the older farts [I read something about that on this list a
>while back :) ] going on 71 who used to shoot a IIIg with 50mm Summicron
>f/2 collapsible back in the early 60s.  Sold it -- stupid me.  What more
>can I say.
>
>Anyway, now I am going into my second childhood I guess.  After years of
>going without (read that - using good SLR cameras) I am yearning to get
>my hands on a good, reliable RF again -- yes, and using the old
>hand-held meter.
>
>Seriously, thanks to all of you for the wonderful pictures, information,
>and great repartee.  One can learn so much from you.  I am greatly
>appreciative, and happy to be a member of this group.
>
>Ted in Olalla
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
>To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
>Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 1:59 PM
>Subject: RE: [Leica] M Durability
>
>
>>It's pretty simple, Bob, not that you and I will ever agree - With
>>incredibly rare exception - and I can't think of such an exception off
>>
>hand,
>
>>but I'm sure one exists - a 40 to 50 year old USED mechanical device
>>
>is not
>
>>going to be as the latest well built version of the same device.
>>
>Better
>
>>build quality? Sure, from an engineering standpoint. But the M6 is a
>>
>damn
>
>>well built camera. We're not talking Leicas and Brownies here.
>>
>>So enjoy your M3 - it's a truly wonderful 1950s machine.
>>
>>B. D.
>>
>>And I know the rangefinders don't fall out, Bob, but they do become
>>
>harder
>
>>and harder to use. And the shutter mechanism CAN go out in an instant.
>>
>And,
>
>>sure, one should have backup bodies.
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>>[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of BOB
>>
>KRAMER
>
>>Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 1:40 PM
>>To: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us'
>>Subject: RE: [Leica] M Durability
>>
>>
>>B.D., How do you really *know* that the M3 is less reliable than the
>>
>M6?
>
>>Unless you can offer some type validation for this view, I imagine
>>
>this is
>
>>more of a  guess on your part then actual knowledge.  If we were
>>
>talking
>
>>automobiles, I would agree with you, but a camera doesn't have near
>>
>the
>
>>moving parts or wear and tear that a car does.
>>
>>So pick your poison, I say.  An older but better built camera, or a
>>
>newer
>
>>camera without the classic build quality.  One thing is for sure.  One
>>
>would
>
>>be smart to carry two bodies regardless of the manufacture date if you
>>
>are
>
>>on a paid assignment.
>>
>>BTW, the mirror separation is a gradual condition that happens over
>>
>many
>
>>years.  Its not like the prism falls out of the camera or anything.
>>
>>BK
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: B. D. Colen [mailto:bdcolen@earthlink.net]
>>Subject: RE: [Leica] M Durability
>>
>>
>>More power to you, Mark - But old cameras do die, just like old cars
>>
>die,
>
>>old home appliances die, and old people die - no matter how well
>>
>they're
>
>>maintained. In the case of Ms, the finders go belly up - and, if one
>>believes Sherry Krauter, cannot be reliably repaired when they do
>>
>(although
>
>>they can be replaced with a more modern rangefinder) - and the shutter
>>curtain roller mechanism goes.
>>
>>But again, its a matter of what you're personally comfortable with. I
>>certainly know that when I'm on a job something can go wrong with one
>>
>of my
>
>>M6s, but I know that that is less likely to happen if I am using a
>>relatively new M6 than it is if I am using an M3 from 1954 - it's just
>>
>a sad
>
>>fact of life.
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, see
>>
>http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, see
>>
>http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>



- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> (RE: [Leica] M Durability)
Message from "Ted Bayer" <tedbayer@harbornet.com> (Re: [Leica] M Durability)