Review: Leica M-A (Typ 127)

[Cuthbert]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That was Nikon's choice for the F3.

 

s-a

 

Yes but Giugiaro is just a stylist, and you see the results...Colani with the T90 made a much better job!

 

 

Wasn't the Hasselblad Lunar the product of a collaboration with an Italian camera designer?   (Talking of Hasselblad, the H5X is fully compatible with the H film backs so arguably counts as a film SLR still being manufactured.)

 

 

Never seen this technological horror before, it looks like a sort of weapon from a cheap sci-fi movie of the 60s...perhaps it's better to stick with the M3 design from outside at least!

Edited May 5, 2015 by Cuthbert

[tookaphotoof]

If size didn't matter and I were a big and strong man I'd probably only be shooting my Hasselblad 501. Love the output of this medium format camera. Can be a pain to focus quickly on the street though. [emoji3]

[semi-ambivalent]

Yes but Giugiaro is just a stylist, and you see the results...Colani with the T90 made a much better job!

I had to google for the T90 and I must say I prefer the F3. T90 is too sleek for me. Certainly, I wasn't at any of the design meetings   but, as well as having to accommodate the given necessities (e.g. removable prism), I think Nikon was also wary of the F3 appearing too pretty, not rugged enough, or too visually distant from its lineage. "Stylist"? What else, the guts are still the responsibility of the engineers.

 

Regards,

s-a

[jip]

You guys are far off-topic

[Cuthbert]

I had to google for the T90 and I must say I prefer the F3. T90 is too sleek for me. Certainly, I wasn't at any of the design meetings   but, as well as having to accommodate the given necessities (e.g. removable prism), I think Nikon was also wary of the F3 appearing too pretty, not rugged enough, or too visually distant from its lineage. "Stylist"? What else, the guts are still the responsibility of the engineers.

 

Regards,

s-a

 

Mmm...I would suggest to visit the T90 Resource page on FB, there are a lot of useful info on the development of that camera:

 

https://www.facebook.com/196124397089606/photos/a.196536953715017.38265.196124397089606/196537093715003/?type=1

 

Including the concept of "form follows function", which is typically an engineer's approach. Giugiario on the other side being a stylist believes in the concept "function follows form"...I remember when he was tasked to design a Formula 1 car by Minardi in the mid 90s, he went to his engineers and said :"I want a F15 without wings", of course the car was junk and he bitched about the restrictive F1 rules that caged his "artistic feeling" or BS like that.

 

 

You guys are far off-topic 

 

We are perfectly IT because Leica instead of going to somebody like ME went to another of these fluffy stylists and see what they did:

 

 

Of course I would have designed that camera in a better way.

Edited May 5, 2015 by Cuthbert

[madNbad]

You guys are far off-topic

Post a review of the Canon T90 and it'll loop back around to the M-A.

[ThePioneer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Nice review but I don't understand why somebody should buy one of these instead of a classic M3 or M4, and don't tell me that old cameras aren't reliable.

You know Cuthbert. I cannot for the life of me figure why you would want to buy and use a moldy old M3 with delaminating mirrors when you could have a magnificent, new, mechanical M film camera that improves on the ones that came before it in every way. Maybe you could explain to all of us why you would voluntarily lift an old, dirty camera to your face, within millimeters from your nose and mouth, that has been used by Lord only knows how many people in the past 60 years or so?

 

Ah well, no accounting for some people's tastes!

[Cuthbert]

You know Cuthbert. I cannot for the life of me figure why you would want to buy and use a moldy old M3 with delaminating mirrors when you could have a magnificent, new, mechanical M film camera that improves on the ones that came before it in every way. Maybe you could explain to all of us why you would voluntarily lift an old, dirty camera to your face, within millimeters from your nose and mouth, that has been used by Lord only knows how many people in the past 60 years or so?

 

Ah well, no accounting for some people's tastes!

 

My M3 is NOT a dirty old camera with delaminating mirrors. And it does have some History, no wear and tear.

 

Judge by youself:

 

[tookaphotoof]

Do I see some dirt on the lens barrel?  

[ThePioneer]

My M3 is NOT a dirty old camera with delaminating mirrors. And it does have some History, no wear and tear.

 

Judge by youself:

 

 

That is certainly a beautiful set and it is quite obvious that it belongs to a discriminating collector. Thank you for sharing.

 

As for "dirty old camera", if you would be so kind as to take a few swabs from different locations on the camera, maybe 5 or 6, then send them to me each well sealed in its own specimen bottle, I feel fairly confident I could change your mind.

 

Additionally, if you can, would you let us know the value of that set when it sold new, translated into today's inflated dollars or euros. Even today I humbly submit that the value far exceeds the pittance that I paid for my M-A.

 

Again, thanks for sharing. I do love good camera porn.

[pico]

and it is the cheapest least expensive ‘M’ series camera Leica sells new today.

 

 

[pico]

My M3 is NOT a dirty old camera with delaminating mirrors. And it does have some History, no wear and tear.

 

Shelf queen?

[M9reno]

You know Cuthbert. I cannot for the life of me figure why you would want to buy and use a moldy old M3 with delaminating mirrors when you could have a magnificent, new, mechanical M film camera that improves on the ones that came before it in every way. Maybe you could explain to all of us why you would voluntarily lift an old, dirty camera to your face, within millimeters from your nose and mouth, that has been used by Lord only knows how many people in the past 60 years or so?

 

Ah well, no accounting for some people's tastes!

One very specific reason why someone might prefer an old M3 to a new M-A (and gladly overlook the germs) is that the M-A will not, as far as I am informed, take reusable cassettes.  So if part of your intention is being able to load from bulk rolls to any length you want, or you wish to avoid scratches that often come from the felt-lined lips of normal cassettes, you are out of luck with an M-A, which in this respect does NOT go back to basics.  The last Leicas to do this were the M6TTL and M6, if fitted together with an M4/M4-2/M4-P baseplate.

[Cuthbert]

Do I see some dirt on the lens barrel?  

 

Shameful! Guess what...I actually shoot with that gear!

 

 

That is certainly a beautiful set and it is quite obvious that it belongs to a discriminating collector. Thank you for sharing.

 

As for "dirty old camera", if you would be so kind as to take a few swabs from different locations on the camera, maybe 5 or 6, then send them to me each well sealed in its own specimen bottle, I feel fairly confident I could change your mind. 

 

Additionally, if you can, would you let us know the value of that set when it sold new, translated into today's inflated dollars or euros. Even today I humbly submit that the value far exceeds the pittance that I paid for my M-A.

 

Again, thanks for sharing. I do love good camera porn.

 

 

Mmm...no, I'm not a collector, I use that stuff, the only "collector's item" is the system case that I use to keep the gear in order and it's rare to find, especially with that colour. Plus, carrying it around is VERY hard for my shoulder, it's even heavier than the Nikon FB-5 case where I keep my F2/FM gear.

 

I'm not a wealthy man, I just bought what you see little by little in the years, I am perfectly aware that new in 1963 I could have bought an house with that set but...it's not 1963 anymore, and my point is that back then the M3 was a revolutionary camera with new features etc...today the M-A not anymore, probably because the Leica customer has become extremely conservative and hostile to any innovation (M5 docet!).

Edited May 6, 2015 by Cuthbert

[ThePioneer]

M9reno, you are absolutely right about the M-A's inability to use the reusable cassettes. I do a bunch of handloading and that is one feature that I wish were available. It is also one of the reasons I still have my own 1954 DS M3, complete with its own unique set of germ buddies.

 

Of course, now that the price of a 100 foot roll of 400TX costs the same as 18 rolls of 135-36 400TX I may not be handloading much longer.

 

Cuthbert, you have truly assembled a very nice set. And I truly meant no disrespect when I called you a disciminating collector. Though I agree that the M-A is not the revolutionary camera that the M3 was in its day, it continues in the same fine steps of all the fine M film cameras produced since the M3. If there is anything to be celebrated it is the fact that a high quality, totally mechanical, film rangefinder is once more being produced in a Leica factory. This has not happened in 28 years.

 

I did not intend to offend, only to poke fun at those who seem to want to denigrate others by running down their choice of camera. Even as your beloved M3 will provide you enjoyment and great photographs, so to will my M-A. And while you discuss the "history" behind your M3, I am also making history with my M-A. In fact, should I be permitted, I suspect that I will have a good many stories to tell about what I have photographed with my M-A over the years.

 

Hopefully my skill as a photographer is equal to the capability of my camera so the stories can be illustrated.

Edited May 7, 2015 by ThePioneer

[philipus]

One very specific reason why someone might prefer an old M3 to a new M-A (and gladly overlook the germs) is that the M-A will not, as far as I am informed, take reusable cassettes.  So if part of your intention is being able to load from bulk rolls to any length you want, or you wish to avoid scratches that often come from the felt-lined lips of normal cassettes, you are out of luck with an M-A, which in this respect does NOT go back to basics.  The last Leicas to do this were the M6TTL and M6, if fitted together with an M4/M4-2/M4-P baseplate.

Al, I think it depends on the cassettes. The IXMOO (and the other name escapes me now) won't work, as I understand it, but I believe modern plastic reusable ones with a screw top will fit. I use these for shooting bulk loaded 5222 in my M4 and Millennium.

 

Best

Philip

[Cuthbert]

No offense taken, my favourite Leicas are the M5 and the Leicolta R5 so I've a thick skin!     

[semi-ambivalent]

Al, I think it depends on the cassettes. The IXMOO (and the other name escapes me now) won't work, as I understand it, but I believe modern plastic reusable ones with a screw top will fit. I use these for shooting bulk loaded 5222 in my M4 and Millennium.

 

Best

Philip

Thanks for that! An inability to take reusable cassettes would kill the sale for me, although I can't imagine what it is about the construction that would cause that. (Off-topic  I'll recommend D-96 for that 5222.)

 

s-a

[M9reno]

Al, I think it depends on the cassettes. The IXMOO (and the other name escapes me now) won't work, as I understand it, but I believe modern plastic reusable ones with a screw top will fit. I use these for shooting bulk loaded 5222 in my M4 and Millennium.

 

Best

Philip

 

Thanks, Philip.  I've never used the plastic ones.  I love the brass.  The other kind is FILCA, but will only fit screwmounts.  (IXMOO, by contrast, is backwards compatible with all Leicas before M7).  s-a, I think it's the shape of the cassette receptacle on more modern film Leicas that gets in the way.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[ThePioneer]

There are the plastic and metal reloadable cassettes that fit, but they do not differ from normal factory cassettes with the felt light traps.

 

The obvious advantage of the Leica IXMOO and FILCA cassettes is that once they are inside the camera is the cassette is fully open and there are no felt traps which, if they gets dusty, can possibly scratch the film as it is pulled through.

 

It has been quite awhile since Leica has built a camera that allows the use of the IXMOO cassette so the fact that it cannot be used in the M-A is not a really big deal. I know they cannot be used with the M6TTL, M7 and MP. I believe it only works on some of the M6 cameras. The thing with the M6 is that at least that camera can be modified with the proper baseplate with the cassette locking and unlocking mechanism.