Tell me about the Leica M4-2

[kivis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Considering a nice condition M4-2. I am seeing conflicting opinions about it on the web. Anyone out there with an M4-2?

[a.noctilux]

Hello,

 

As always with M4-2 some people love it and some not:

See http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/182819-i-love-my-m4-2/

 

Myself, I have one, but don't use it as I would because I also use other Ms.

Mine never has/need CLA, so very reliable (but little use).

 

Arnaud

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[pico]

Considering a nice condition M4-2. I am seeing conflicting opinions about it on the web. Anyone out there with an M4-2?

As a matter of principle I avoid the M4-2 and consider an M4 instead. There are ongoing arguments, but

I rather have the M4 viewfinder (more compliant to off-center viewing & focusing), and the M4 internals

were hand fitted. The later is my old man's prejudice.

 

If you want an M4 type with a complete set of finder frames, then the M4-P is necessary.

[cobbu2]

If you consider that the M4-2 is the basis for the M4-P (also made in Canada) and the M6 that followed as far as internals are concerned, then it in my view, receives undue criticism if those newer models are more revered.  The problem M4-2s came from the very first production batches, and the bodies made since were much better reliability-wise.  AFAIK the steel gearing that was incorporated in the M4-2 (instead of brass, to take the additional stress of the optional motor drive, reportedly makes the M4-2 not as smooth for winding as the M4), was retained in later models.

 

I've owned a definitely well-used M4-2 for over five years now with no issues.  And I also personally appreciate the uncluttered viewfinder with 35/50/90/135-only framelines.

 

In short, I believe it's highly underrated, receiving hugely more second-hand negativity than it deserves (and as a result, more apt to be a bargain)... but that's just my experience; I say go for it!

[sblitz]

I am with Pico on this one. Hold an M4

In your hand, wind and shoot. The M4P address some of the quality issues in the M4-2 which was made to lower the cost of the M4, so that should answer some questions their. One last thing, the later M4-2 and on changed their viewfinder such that they flared. Hated it on my M6 enough to sell it. No flare in the M4. It is a gem

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pgk]

Considering a nice condition M4-2. I am seeing conflicting opinions about it on the web. Anyone out there with an M4-2?

 

I've owned a few and had as little trouble with them as M4s, M4-Ps or M6s - that is to say very little. I now own M4s but would have no hesitation in owning another M4-2 if I needed another M film camera. Cosmetics are one thing though, but mechanics are more important IMO, so ensure that everything is working as it should or it will need a service. Because M4-2s have suffered prejudice  , some have been cheaper and so been bought as 'users' so have seen heavy use - I've seen some battered ones still running well. If they've been serviced they should have had any problems sorted out. If clean and little used a service might reveal things which need attention though.

[a911s]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Great camera. M6 motor compatible with better 50mm framelines. 

[ramarren]

The M4-2 bears some consideration as being the M that kept Leica in business after the cancellation of the CL (not for lack of popularity, but for the warranty costs that made it hugely unprofitable), the failure of the M5 in the marketplace, and the poor sales of the R system cameras in the early and middle 1970s. The M4, lovely though it was, cost WAY too much to manufacture and Leica needed a revived M4 to meet the market demand that could actually turn a profit. So the M4-2 was created with an all-new manufacturing process that simplified and reduced cost of manufacture. The M4-2 has improved strength steel transport gears, ability to use a power winder, hot shoe flash sync, etc. Of course there were some problems in the first production run in 1978, with some cameras needing rework after they were sold, etc. That's what generated all the bad press about the model, along with all the horror of the past several years of Leica problems. Leica sorted the problems out, reworked whatever cameras were sent in with defects, and the rest of the runs were without incident. 

 

The M4-2 was made in three production runs, 1978, 1979, and 1980, (a few cameras technically in 1977 as well) before segueing to the M4-P, which nominally changed the viewfinder (to include six frames rather than just four) and a few minor internal tweaks. The M4-2 viewfinder is identical optically to the M4 viewfinder until a running change was made in the middle of the second manufacturing run. It seems the people buying them wanted the frame lines to be a bit brighter, so Leica added or subtracted an element in the viewfinder optics that achieved the brighter view at the expense of narrowing down the exit pupil a bit and causing a propensity to flare. The revised optics are identical to what's in the M4-P, M6, M6TTL, and M7 (maybe) ... they revised them yet again with the MP and back-fitted that design into the M7 production (all the digital Ms have the improved viewfinder optics, albeit with .68x vs .72x magnification, the typ 240 and later models, including the M-A, getting yet another round of minor improvements). 

 

I'd had M3, M2, M4, M4-P, M4-2, M6, and M6TTL film Ms when I traded off my M system for a Hasselblad 903SWC in 2002. When I wanted to acquire another film M in 2011, I picked a mid-first production run M4-2 because I wanted the simpler M4 viewfinder AND the hot-shoe flash sync, the ability to fit a motor should the occasion arise. Got it from KEH in "bargain" condition for about $700. Only thing I could find wrong with it was that the viewfinder needed cleaning, collimation, lubrication, and calibration ... which cost another $100 at my local camera tech. The shutter is slightly off at 1/1000 and 1/500, someday I'll need to have that overhauled, but in the meantime it works like a charm and is smooth as any of my older M3, M2, M4, etc models were. It's probably my last film M, and will probably outlast me. 

 

So don't be afraid of an M4-2. It's a fine camera, like all Ms, and just as nicely made as the rest of them. If you get one with a few problems, just don't over-pay for it, then have it overhauled and use it forever. 

[Jeff S]

 

So don't be afraid of an M4-2. It's a fine camera, like all Ms, and just as nicely made as the rest of them. If you get one with a few problems, just don't over-pay for it, then have it overhauled and use it forever. 

 

And hope that it's one that someone like Sherry Krauter can reliably fix....  http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/56943-i-love-my-m4-p/?p=893255

 

I would stick to a reputable dealer who would refund purchase if it didn't pass muster.

 

Jeff

[ramarren]

And hope that it's one that someone like Sherry Krauter can reliably fix....  http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/56943-i-love-my-m4-p/?p=893255

 

I would stick to a reputable dealer who would refund purchase if it didn't pass muster.

 

 

I have had DAG do all my Leica and Minox repairs for years. I've never had a single instance where he could not get the work done right the first time. One of my M4-Ps in an earlier age was overhauled by Sherry just before I bought it. It also was perfect as I received it. I've only had one lens and one camera go back to the technician in all the time I've been messing about with old cameras ... some thirty-plus years now. (dang, I'm getting old.)

 

If a camera is "shimmed up all over the place and the parts didn't fit", it means it was damaged by some earlier hands. One of the things the M4-2 did, by comparison to earlier Ms, was replace a vast amount of the hand-shimmed bits with larger, simpler to assemble subcomponents which didn't need hand-shimming. So when you see a lot of hand-shimming in an M4-2 or later camera, it means that someone has messed around with it, exchanged parts for parts from some older model, etc. 

 

The one I bought, according to my local tech, had either never been apart, or had been apart by the factory only and put back together to factory spec with original parts. It is in remarkably nice, original and functional shape for seemingly being utterly neglected for the majority of its 38 years. 

Edited September 7, 2016 by ramarren

[adan]

An M4-2 was my first M Leica in 2001. Early production (first 2000 block). Only problem was due to age (the felt light traps the shutter curtains slide between were worn down - occasional light leaks when changing lenses in bright light. I learned a little "Leica twist" at the waist, to turn the camera away from the sun when swapping lenses ).

 

Age will have an effect (the earliest M4-2s are pushing 40) - at a minimum, the top shutter speed will likely be down to around 1/700th second unless it has had a recent CLA.

 

Part of the distaste out there for the M4-2 was due to the steel winding gears, which were stronger, but did not "break in" to butter-smoothness with use, as did the malleable brass gears in the M4, which rubbed one another smooth. If you had used an M-4 previously, it was noticeable. If, like me, it is your first Leica, you'll never know the difference.

 

Other cost-saving mods that were fine for working pros, but drive the LEICAMEN crazy, were the deletion of the self-timer (saved a few grams in weight, though); the substitution of a round plastic "note pad" for recording ISO/Film type in place of the expensive silvery engraved rotating film indicator; and the industrial black-chrome finish in place of black paint or silver chrome (a few late M4-2s came in silver chrome).

 

Personally, I liked the fact that it was an industrial tool, and not male jewelry.

 

Considerations - if you'll ever want to use a 75mm lens, you'll be better off with the M4-P.  A 28 is not as big a deal, since "the whole finder" is exactly the same area as the 28 lines squeezed into the M4-P et seq. - and there is always the option of an external accessory 28mm finder. The M4-2 had the original M4/M2 viewfinder frame for the 90mm lens, with a more complete "box" including corner marks - degraded in the M4-P and all later cameras.

[michaelwj]

The main reason I'm not too keen on the M4-2 (and -P) is the film reminder. What are you supposed to write on it with? 

 

How's that for the ultimate trivial reason?

 

To point out how trivial, the sticker on the film reminder on my M6 (which I don't use a battery in) has previously come off and been replaced in the incorrect position so it doesn't line up anymore. I don't even use it - But still, what's with writing on the back of the camera?

[michaelwj]

Now that I'm thinking about it, an M4-2 might just make the perfect body cap for my super angulon...

 

Damn these threads.

[ramarren]

The main reason I'm not too keen on the M4-2 (and -P) is the film reminder. What are you supposed to write on it with? 

 

How's that for the ultimate trivial reason?

 

To point out how trivial, the sticker on the film reminder on my M6 (which I don't use a battery in) has previously come off and been replaced in the incorrect position so it doesn't line up anymore. I don't even use it - But still, what's with writing on the back of the camera?

 

 

A small #2 pencil works well.

 

I put the nice A&A half-case on mine, though, which has a slot for a film box end in it. I put a piece of card stock in that instead and use the pencil to write the film in the camera there. Since I only rarely leave a roll of film in a camera past a single shooting session, I usually ignore the reminder... 

[ramarren]

...

Age will have an effect (the earliest M4-2s are pushing 40) - at a minimum, the top shutter speed will likely be down to around 1/700th second unless it has had a recent CLA.

...

Personally, I liked the fact that it was an industrial tool, and not male jewelry.

...

Considerations - if you'll ever want to use a 75mm lens, you'll be better off with the M4-P.  A 28 is not as big a deal, since "the whole finder" is exactly the same area as the 28 lines squeezed into the M4-P et seq. - and there is always the option of an external accessory 28mm finder. The M4-2 had the original M4/M2 viewfinder frame for the 90mm lens, with a more complete "box" including corner marks - degraded in the M4-P and all later cameras. 

 

The shutter in mine is running a bit fast on one end and a bit slow on the other; the difference is about 0.3EV at 1/500 and 0.7EV at 1/1000 according to the shutter tester. I presume this means that the lubrication has dried out over the past forty years and the brake isn't working to spec. I should probably send it in and have it overhauled soon. 

 

I use the M4-2 mostly with either Color Skopar 35 or 50 mm lenses. The M-Rokkor 90 and Hektor 135 work well on it too, and I fit the WATE now and then with a Voigtländer 21mm accessory finder. 

[adan]

The main reason I'm not too keen on the M4-2 (and -P) is the film reminder. What are you supposed to write on it with?

 

Grease pencil (a.k.a china marker) - which, of course, any serious PJ in 1977 had scads of, for marking up contact sheets. Once you'd peeled one down to a couple of inches through darkroom use, you could recycle the stub to your camera bag. Black was not great for contacts, yellow or white were hard to see on the M4-2/M4-P, red worked well on either.

 

https://artecalifornia.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/china-marker1.jpg

 

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7472/15864129809_728c8334b4_b.jpg

 

Although personally, I just got Avery or Dennison ³/₄" color-coded dots, and stuck those on and peeled them off as needed - green for Tri-X/HP-5, blue for Velvia, red for K'chrome, yellow for any color neg (with speeds marked on with a "Sharpie" if needed.) If I wanted to get fancy, the single-color packages also covered purple (Plus-X), dark blue (Fujichrome or Ektachrome 400), orange (regular or day-glo - Ilford Pan F), or brown (Kodak Panatomic-X).

 

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61MkjzQMg3L._SL256_.jpg

Edited September 7, 2016 by adan

[michaelwj]

This is how I identify my bulk rolled film, yellow dot is 400, red dot is 125. Easy enough to transfer to the back of the camera I suppose.

Nice.

[kivis]

I am told that M4-2 has brass top and bottom plates. So does it brass? Also I assume the ASA/DIN (ISO) reminder doesn't really do anything.

[duckrider]

Yes,it's brass with "black chromium". For this reason it will not be "brassed" like the painted versions of other Ms. There will come some brigher metal (chromium?) out if black coating vanishes.

But if this happens camera really has to be handled rough!

Thomas

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[ramarren]

Yes,it's brass with "black chromium". For this reason it will not be "brassed" like the painted versions of other Ms. There will come some brigher metal (chromium?) out if black coating vanishes.

But if this happens camera really has to be handled rough!

Thomas

 

 

Yes. Mine has a lovely, satiny black chrome sheen.