Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/07/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]There is no way one an contend that an M6 is as well made a photographic instrument as the M3 - consider the degradation of the rangefinder is nothing else. ;-) However, when compared to everything else out there, the M6 is still one damn well built camera. B. D. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Steve LeHuray Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 12:04 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] Marc Small's statement that M6 is best built M camera > Hi Chandos: > > What I meant to say was that the M4-P and M4-2 were not the equal in > build of the M4. That is not my experience as I have not ever owned or > used either. My comment was based upon information provided byg > experienced LHSA people who had used both extensively. In fact, I > believe Roy Moss, past President and former editor-in-chief of > VIEWFINDER wrote an article detailing the ways in which they both fell > short of the M4. > > Seth LaK 9 > ...yeah, but Seth, Roy was notoriously conservative in any tolerance towards change with Leica models. Personnaly I have M2s, M3, M6TTLs and they are equally well made IMHO. Some people have complained that the M6 has some plastic parts compared to the M2/3/4 metal parts -- plastic? so what? There are plastic parts on the space shuttle and the Corvette body is plastic. Regards, sl - -- 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