assinder Posted June 19, 2010 Share #1 Posted June 19, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm curious - I've bought a nice, very well used M4-P and only just noticed the serial no. is 1532885 which is too low, it seems to fall into the M4-2 range. There's no sign that the camera has been messed about with in any way, apart from some odd "repairs" to the rear door with stick-on felt, which I'm replacing with the correct material . Anyone any ideas? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 19, 2010 Posted June 19, 2010 Hi assinder, Take a look here M4-P wrong serial no?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
doubice Posted June 19, 2010 Share #2 Posted June 19, 2010 According to many serial number lists, it should be an M4-2 produced in 1980. However - that is also the last year of the M4-2's production, whith the M4-P having started at approximately 1 54x xxx. So - you may have an original M4-P, which does not fit into the regular serial number runs (not unusual) or, an M4-2 converted to an M4-P. If memory serves me right, the main difference between the two cameras was the inclusion of the 28mm frame lines on the 'P. Does your camera have those? I had the 28/90, 35/135, 50/75 frames installed into an M5 many years ago so, an M4-2 being advertised by a seller as an M4-P because of the frame lines is also possible. Best, Jan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted June 20, 2010 Share #3 Posted June 20, 2010 I have a M4-P chrome ( 1/2000 made ) which have a M4-2 s/n : 1 532 xxx made in 1980. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 20, 2010 Share #4 Posted June 20, 2010 (edited) Welcome to the forum ! I can add that M4-2 and M4-P were the first Leicas with the s/n engraved only onto the accessory shoe (apart the Japan-made CL) : a certain mismatching in the numbers is not a difficult occurring. It has also been reported that the Ontario factory (which had complete control on M4-2 and M4P production) set up "new manufacturing processes" that can have a role in this question. Edited June 20, 2010 by luigi bertolotti Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted June 20, 2010 Share #5 Posted June 20, 2010 (edited) Just remember that Leica's numbering blocks were not designed to help collectors - they were just company projections. The 1532xxx numbers date to 1980 - and both M4-2 and M4-P bodies were made in 1980, in the same small Midland factory. Leica set aside blocks of numbers in advance for specific products, and that tends to be what historians go by in creating "lists" after the fact, but if a product changed halfway through a block, the factory just kept on using the numbers already in place. I had a very early "compact" 90 'cron, officially introduced in 1980. The serial number, however, dated to 1977, according to the "lists". Obviously it just took Leica so long to build out the block of 90 'crons assigned in 1977 that the model had changed before they used up the numbers set aside three years before. I imagine the same kind of thing happened in the -2 to -P changeover. Leica originally intended to make at least 2000 M4-2s in 1980 and set aside the numbers 1531xxx-1533xxx in January (to avoid doubling up with Wetzlar-made R4s, 1533xxx-1543xxx), but part way through that block (presumably around March) they "invented" the M4-P and just used up the remaining preassigned "Leica M body" numbers before defining the next number block by the new camera designation M4-P in July. They probably had a box full of ready-numbered hot shoes, and rather than throw them away, or continue building another 1000 M4-2s when they could put a "new, improved" camera on the market.... In other words: Leica didn't make a mistake - the historians made a mistake in assuming that Leica actually built what they had projected at the beginning of the year. Edit: I'll just add this quote from Stephen Gandy's Leica number list: "The reality of it is that the list was not made with all the precision that Leica collectors might like, but then the list wasn't made by Leica collectors -- it was made by people simply trying to get their job done -- sometimes at the end of a long day at work." http://www.cameraquest.com/leicanum.htm Edited June 20, 2010 by adan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 20, 2010 Share #6 Posted June 20, 2010 I had a very early "compact" 90 'cron, officially introduced in 1980. The serial number, however, dated to 1977, according to the "lists". Obviously it just took Leica so long to build out the block of 90 'crons assigned in 1977 that the model had changed before they used up the numbers set aside three years before. My recently-acquired Telyt -S 800 probably set a record in this sense... ... they reserved 350 numbers in 1971... 23 years later (according to an official letter from Solms that I have) they built the last, without even "finishing" the batch (109 built, according to the above letter). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlancasterd Posted June 20, 2010 Share #7 Posted June 20, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) My recently-acquired Telyt -S 800 probably set a record in this sense... ... they reserved 350 numbers in 1971... 23 years later (according to an official letter from Solms that I have) they built the last, without even "finishing" the batch (109 built, according to the above letter). I heard a story that these lenses cost so much (and consequently sold so slowly) that one (US) dealer went to the length of offering a VW car with each lens sold... This sounds unlikely, but the unlikeliest things do sometimes happen, as I know from my own experience. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 21, 2010 Share #8 Posted June 21, 2010 I heard a story that these lenses cost so much (and consequently sold so slowly) that one (US) dealer went to the length of offering a VW car with each lens sold... This sounds unlikely, but the unlikeliest things do sometimes happen, as I know from my own experience. Yes... me too read this story somewhere... seems it was a direct initiative of Leica USA, and the car was a VW Fox. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert J Posted June 22, 2010 Share #9 Posted June 22, 2010 Welcome to the forum ! I can add that M4-2 and M4-P were the first Leicas with the s/n engraved only onto the accessory shoe (apart the Japan-made CL) : a certain mismatching in the numbers is not a difficult occurring. It has also been reported that the Ontario factory (which had complete control on M4-2 and M4P production) set up "new manufacturing processes" that can have a role in this question. Wouldn't the M5,with its serial number engraved on the accessory shoe be the first Leica to have its serial number on the accessory shoe? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 22, 2010 Share #10 Posted June 22, 2010 Wouldn't the M5,with its serial number engraved on the accessory shoe be the first Leica to have its serial number on the accessory shoe? Uh... right, indeed... the M5 is my perennial "black hole" when I think of Leicas... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted June 22, 2010 Share #11 Posted June 22, 2010 Uh... right, indeed... the M5 is my perennial "black hole" when I think of Leicas... For me, the M5, in the early 70, was really an advanced rangefinder camera, the escamotable cell at the rear of the lens a must for macrophotography and Tele photography, the availabilty of speed in the viewfinder, as on the SL and the large speed wheel that can be reached and activated with one finger Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
assinder Posted June 24, 2010 Author Share #12 Posted June 24, 2010 Blimey, I wasn't expecting such comprehensive replies. Thank you all so much, my curiosity is now completely satisfied. BTW, M4-P fabulous camera (once I removed the winder and replaced it with normal base plate). Regards. Nick. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.