Jump to content

Leica M-A problem


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Recently bought a new Leica M-A.

Put my first test film through it and found a problem. The spacing between the negatives were very narrow compared to that found with my M7. And more importantly, the spacings were irregular and some of the frames also appeared to be stepped?

I wondered if anyone can comment on the size of the spacing in the negative normally found with a M-A (and if they also have an M7  - do they differ in size to the M-A).

My Leica dealer acknowledged there is a fault with the irregular spacings found in the negative(s) and have very quickly responded by offering a replacement.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for the reply.

No, I used the same lens (35mm) on both cameras. 

I guess the irregular spacings are due to the film advancement, due to the pressure plate or some form of gearing that restricts the film being advanced normally to provide consistent and the same sequential spacing. I am not familiar enough or experienced to really provide a detailed description to you experienced Leica users.

What interests me is there a difference in the spacings between the frames on the negative between both cameras (ie M-A v M7). And had anyone else experienced irregular spacing with their M-A.

Thanks for your help,

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear that M-A is not "perfect from new".

If you used the same lens 35mm, yes there is a problem with the film advance mechanism somewhere.

With some wide-angle (S-A 21mm or symetrical optical cell lens), the frames spacing can be shallow if not "touching frames".

Your Leica dealer is nice to offer a replacement M-A on the go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your kind response.

Yes, my Leica dealer, Red Dot Cameras in London are long established and have a good reputation. One of the reasons I bought from them and they have kept me informed on the availability of an M-A. It appears Leica only produce them in low numbers and I guess they only do so when there are sufficient (pre-) order requests.

Intetesting to hear of the narrow frame spacing when an ultra-wide angle lens is used.  With my test films most of the spacings were very narrow where the frames appeared to be touching (when splicing it was so narrow it cut into the frames); and then I had these irregular larger spacings which which varied in width and appeared in no particular sequence.

Red Dot are arranging to collect the faulty M-A and will be sending out a new one as soon as it arrives! 

But I would still like to know what the normal frame spacing is found using an M-A.

Thanks for your help,

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

Different lenses will show different spacing as the light falls behind the film gate depending on the focal length.

I think I've seen different spacing on most of my film cameras. As long as there is spacing and the frames aren't overlapping then I don't think it's a problem to worry about as such.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Frames spacing don't change with M-A or M-P (or earlier Ms ) with same lenses used.

With fine working M-A you would obtain same spacings as your M7.

This link to a very nice read, here

 

On 4/22/2010 at 8:51 PM, adan said:

".....the image area of a Leica M camera (not the lens) is constant and not dependent on the focal length of the lens in use."

 

Sorry, you may not be aware that this happens with older Leica M super-wides, but it is a real effect. However, I agree that mechanical slop is a more likely suspect, unless the OP confesses to shooting with a Super-Angulon and 135 interchangeably.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by a.noctilux
Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, earleygallery said:

Different lenses will show different spacing as the light falls behind the film gate depending on the focal length.

I think I've seen different spacing on most of my film cameras. As long as there is spacing and the frames aren't overlapping then I don't think it's a problem to worry about as such.

Thanks again for replying.

the spacings are not overlapping (yet) but I found on my 2nd test film that there was a greater degree of irregular spacing within a sequence of three adjoining frames. The worry was that it may lead to an overlap in time...but with the spacing being so close that they are almost touching was still a worry. And as said it meant that when cutting the film into lengths meant I had to cut into some of the frane(s).

Thanks again for the info.

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, a.noctilux said:

Frames spacing don't change with M-A or M-P (or earlier Ms ) with same lenses used.

With fine working M-A you would obtain same spacings as your M7.

This link to a very nice read, here

 

 

 

Thanks for the feedback on the spacings with an M-A and M7 where the distance of the frame spacings are the same. This is what I would have presumed it would be. And thanks for the attached detail.

My faulty camera is to be collected and the new one will be sent out.

Regatds,

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surprising!  Just to echo what you’ve already heard from others, I also have found spacing to be absolutely regular and consistent regardless of lenses used, on M-A, MP, and M6.  I can’t say exactly how wide, but wide enough to easily cut with scissors, even when I don’t cut exactly straight 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Keith (M) said:

Interesting about spacing. Just had a check of a roll of Tri-X I developed yesterday from my M7, on which I had used 35, 50 and 135mm lenses. The frame spacing is entirely consistent.

Hope a new M-A is provided asap!

Thanks Keith, I found the spacing on my M7 to be just perfect giving a distinctive and consistent distance between the frames. Easy to differentiate making them easy to cut into strips.

Regards,

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, harmen said:

Surprising!  Just to echo what you’ve already heard from others, I also have found spacing to be absolutely regular and consistent regardless of lenses used, on M-A, MP, and M6.  I can’t say exactly how wide, but wide enough to easily cut with scissors, even when I don’t cut exactly straight 😉

Thanks Harmen,  I would have thought the spacings between the various recent M cameras would be very similar and certainly consistently regular. Nice to hear that your experience with your cameras confirms my thoughts.  

With the spacings on my M7 there is plenty of latitude to cut with scissors even if not straight!

Kind regards,

Paul

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys

One evidence of irregular film transport is if the cuts between the frames do not have the same position related to the perforation.

If the camera works properly the cut is always in the middle between two holes. I develop an cut my films at home and never had to cut across a hole, regardless if the film was taken with a M body (1955-2011) or one of my Leica III bodies (1934). As far as I know the position between two frames is already defined like this since Barnack’s first prototype and has never been changed. The reason is that it is easier to handle the film strips if they are not cut across the hole. I do not know the exact perforation pitch (Kodak’s price list for bulk film indicates the perforation) but it should be something that the frame advance will be around  39mm.

Btw: when I developed my first roll after using my 21mm Super-Angulon for the first time I was surprised of the reduced spacing. And as I changed lenses several times the spacing between two frames was irregular. Exactly as a.noctilux wrote. But as the cuts were always between tho holes I realized that the film advance mechanism is still working fine.

Best regards.

Frank

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just checked a few of my negatives from my M2, M3 and M6 and spacing seems consistent. 

The only time I had an issue with irregular spacing between frames was with a Rollei 35S, caused by worn film sprockets (a common problem, apparently).

Some frames would sometimes go beyond touching and actually overlap while there would be rather wide spaces between others.

Scanning these were a nightmare.

I'm glad to hear they're offering you a good solution.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Edgar1920 said:

Hi guys

One evidence of irregular film transport is if the cuts between the frames do not have the same position related to the perforation.

If the camera works properly the cut is always in the middle between two holes. I develop an cut my films at home and never had to cut across a hole, regardless if the film was taken with a M body (1955-2011) or one of my Leica III bodies (1934). As far as I know the position between two frames is already defined like this since Barnack’s first prototype and has never been changed. The reason is that it is easier to handle the film strips if they are not cut across the hole. I do not know the exact perforation pitch (Kodak’s price list for bulk film indicates the perforation) but it should be something that the frame advance will be around  39mm.

Btw: when I developed my first roll after using my 21mm Super-Angulon for the first time I was surprised of the reduced spacing. And as I changed lenses several times the spacing between two frames was irregular. Exactly as a.noctilux wrote. But as the cuts were always between tho holes I realized that the film advance mechanism is still working fine.

Best regards.

Frank

 

Thanks Frank, great point and will now check my negatives to see if the spacings coincide with the holes. 

Interesting to note the sos Jung’s can change dependant in the lens choice. As I use almost exclusively a 35mm this has never come up. But I may want to add another wide-angle in the future.

Kind regards,

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, plaidshirts said:

I just checked a few of my negatives from my M2, M3 and M6 and spacing seems consistent. 

The only time I had an issue with irregular spacing between frames was with a Rollei 35S, caused by worn film sprockets (a common problem, apparently).

Some frames would sometimes go beyond touching and actually overlap while there would be rather wide spaces between others.

Scanning these were a nightmare.

I'm glad to hear they're offering you a good solution.

 

 

 

Again, thanks for posting your comments...all very interesting and useful...especially to a newby.

Regards,

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone who has posted replies. This has been very helpful and I am most grateful for you guys sharing your thought and experiences.

The good news is that my faulty camera is to be collected on Monday and my new replacement camera is to be sent to me on the Tuesday. All thanks to Red Dot Cameras in London who have not hesitated in providing great customer service and have not stopped apologising for sending me a faulty camera unbeknown to them.

Of course as soon as I get my replacement M-A I will be putting a test film through it...and hopefully all will be good. I hope so as I just want to be using this lovely camera which is a joy to hold and use. 

What a great forum this is with friendly and useful advice from everyone. Can’t thank you all enough.

many thanks to everyone,

Paul

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...