Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/02/24

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Question: Single Stroke vs. Double Stroke M3
From: "Don Dory" <dorysrus@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 20:42:19 -0500
References: <20030225011413.97780.qmail@web40807.mail.yahoo.com>

Part of this discussion ignores the decision by Leica to use a "glass"
pressure plate.  I think that these plates were indeed more prone to static
than the metal plates used before and after.  So, with the decision to use
the superior glass plate, the decision to ameliorate static marks with a
slower wind makes sense.  Bear in mind that Leica had clockwork motors and
other rapid advance methods in place.

Don
dorysrus@mindspring.com

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

Replies: Reply from Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh@pacbell.net> (Re: [Leica] Question: Single Stroke vs. Double Stroke M3)
In reply to: Message from Javier Perez <summarex@yahoo.com> (Re: [Leica] Question: Single Stroke vs. Double Stroke M3)