Leica M-A problem

[M9reno]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My advice would be to ask Malcolm Taylor for his view on what might be happening.  It might be a simple case of tightening something in the forward mechanism, which is currently slipping and yielding the inconsistent spacings, and it is the kind of thing he would know about and even be able to fix easily.  If this sort of thing is slipping past Leica QC repeatedly, it does not speak well for their ability to address your problem, or even give you a perfect third replacement.

[Paul Robinson]

34 minutes ago, M9reno said:

My advice would be to ask Malcolm Taylor for his view on what might be happening.  It might be a simple case of tightening something in the forward mechanism, which is currently slipping and yielding the inconsistent spacings, and it is the kind of thing he would know about and even be able to fix easily.  If this sort of thing is slipping past Leica QC repeatedly, it does not speak well for their ability to address your problem, or even give you a perfect third replacement.

Hi  M9reno,  thanks for the posting.

Please who is Malcolm Taylor and how do I contact him?

I live in the UK.

Paul

[Advertisement]

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

[Paul Robinson]

7 minutes ago, Paul Robinson said:

Hi  M9reno,  thanks for the posting.

Please who is Malcolm Taylor and how do I contact him?

I live in the UK.

Paul

It’s okay I found him.

thanks,

Paul

[semi-ambivalent]

10 hours ago, Paul Robinson said:

Thanks, semi-ambivalent,

interesting to hear your M-A has variable spacings between the frames. 

As you commented not to much a problem for you, unless you wanted to do transparency work. With my M-A when it comes to the narrowest of the spacings it is difficult to cut between the frames without cutting into them because of how closely they are spaced together. And of course the worry is also if the problem persists and progressively worsens over time? As I have read in some instance it can lead to frames overlapping.

Paul 

Paul,

I'm not being cavalier about this. I have a few Leicas and don't bother to mark on the negatives which camera they came from. I will make a mental note the next time I use the M-A to see exactly how it behaves but I myself have posted about "narrow" frame separation. I attribute it to the angle of incidence of light hitting the film with RF wideangles, which can put the back lens element very close to the film. Because of the rangefinder I've learned to frame a little loosey-goosey to make sure I get what I want in the frame, so if the scissors clip a bit of the frame I don't lose needed parts of the image within. But that's *me*. *You* are treating it differently and that is your option and right. If your M-A is a replacement already you might not want to use it a lot if you want to keep replacing it again an option. I have no answer there. I can only suggest you shoot it in and see if things "improved" which could certainly burn at least one bridge. I have never seen overlapping frames. For all the technology inside a film Leica it bears remembering it's technology of the 1920s. That's one reason the damn things last so long and can command the prices they do decades after their manufacture. Perhaps it's an oxymoron but I give them a certain Germanic élan. Do whatever feels best for you to do and lets you sleep at night.

s-a

[wattsy]

On 3/10/2019 at 10:06 PM, Paul Robinson said:

Would Wattsy be willing to help?  Would very much appreciate any assistance.  

Paul, my negs look like Harmen's colour ones – a consistent but fairly narrow gap.

Are you saying that your replacement M-A negs are noticeably irregularly spaced? Is this using the same lens? (Might be useful to remove at least one potential variable and run a roll of film with just a single lens). Have you watched the film wind with the base plate off? If you haven't, I think it would be worth losing a roll of film and doing exactly that because you may see some slippage or other odd behaviour going on as you wind the film.

Regarding the comments about MP versus M-A reliability, there may be some truth to that but I doubt there is any difference between MPs and M-As of recent build because they are built in batches by the same people in the same factory and both cameras use mostly the same parts. I can't imagine there is any difference in the wind mechanism between the two cameras. As such, I doubt there is much point acquiring a new MP to get around the present problem.

Obviously, it is worth waiting to hear back from Germany before making any drastic decisions but my guess is they will simply ask for the camera to be sent to them for examination. Wetzlar's stock answer to 'marginal' problems like this is a CLA but it might be worth going that route because you will end up with a camera that has been put (back) together with greater care than might be the case with a camera on the usual production line. You also have the two year warranty. If the camera gets worse or you simply find, over time, that the frame spacing is unacceptable, Leica will deal with it. In my experience, they can be slow but they are also very good at taking care of problems that arise (even with products where the warranty has long elapsed).

Edited March 17, 2019 by wattsy

[M9reno]

I’m not sure that observing the mechanism will reveal anything to a lay person.  We are talking of slippages of a millimetre or less on the occasional frame - very hard to see with the naked eye without a measuring instrument, or without an indirect medium such as a developed roll of film.

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

13 minutes ago, M9reno said:

I’m not sure that observing the mechanism will reveal anything to a lay person.  We are talking of slippages of a millimetre or less on the occasional frame - very hard to see with the naked eye without a measuring instrument, or without an indirect medium such as a developed roll of film.

I was thinking there might be some kind of stutter or other anomaly that might mark out some winds from others. It might be possible to also see if winding harder/faster or softer/slower makes any difference (obviously it shouldn't). The OP seems to suggest that the variable spacing is greater than a millimetre or less difference but I haven't seen his negs. 

I guess another question for the OP is whether the variable spacing is totally random or if there is a pattern – e.g. spacing becomes wider or narrower as the frame count goes up. My non-expert opinion is that a pattern would at least indicate something that could be adjusted. Totally random, variable spacing, who knows?

Edited March 17, 2019 by wattsy

[delta100]

Forgive me, this might sound stupid. The Leica handbook says when loading  1) Advance the film by one frame using the quick wind lever and release the shutter. 2) Then tension the film by turning the rewind knob in the direction of red arrow. The film is properly wound if the rewind knob turns in the opposite direction to the arrow when the quick wind lever is operated again. Also the rewind release lever R must be in the vertical position. If still a problem return to Leica Germany!

[harmen]

As long as one doesn’t enthusiastically tension the film between shots thereafter.

Edited March 17, 2019 by harmen

[ianman]

1 hour ago, MP2 said:

Forgive me, this might sound stupid. The Leica handbook says when loading  1) Advance the film by one frame using the quick wind lever and release the shutter. 2) Then tension the film by turning the rewind knob in the direction of red arrow. The film is properly wound if the rewind knob turns in the opposite direction to the arrow when the quick wind lever is operated again.

Why does it sound stupid? It's the same process in all other film cameras I have used.

[delta100]

I am making a very simple point  about any suspected camera faults - Read the hand book first!

[earleygallery]

I have another suggestion to avoid a lengthy wait for your camera if you return it to Leica and they decide it’s not a fault. Can you visit a Leica store and ask to run a film through their demo M-A, using your own lens. See if there’s any difference. 

You’re comparing 2 examples of the M-A with an M7 which might have some slightly different design in some parts of the mechanism. It could be the batch of M-A bodies Red Dot have are all faulty which is highly unlikely but trying another one from another source should answer the question. 

[jcraf]

Funnily enough yesterday, whilst helping out as I regularly do, in a friend's London Leica dealership (one which might have been mentioned in this very thread), a gentleman brought in his M-A for commision sale because he was no longer using it.  This camera had been a replacement from Wetzlar because of irregular frame spacing on his original M-A. That original camera had been bought from a Leica dealer situated some distance from London, who had arranged the replacement directly via Leica.  It seems that Wetzlar agreed there was an issue and it was a no quibble replacement.

So oddly enough, seemingly not an isolated issue in the M-A. 

Edited March 17, 2019 by jcraf

[Paul Robinson]

14 hours ago, semi-ambivalent said:

Paul,

I'm not being cavalier about this. I have a few Leicas and don't bother to mark on the negatives which camera they came from. I will make a mental note the next time I use the M-A to see exactly how it behaves but I myself have posted about "narrow" frame separation. I attribute it to the angle of incidence of light hitting the film with RF wideangles, which can put the back lens element very close to the film. Because of the rangefinder I've learned to frame a little loosey-goosey to make sure I get what I want in the frame, so if the scissors clip a bit of the frame I don't lose needed parts of the image within. But that's *me*. *You* are treating it differently and that is your option and right. If your M-A is a replacement already you might not want to use it a lot if you want to keep replacing it again an option. I have no answer there. I can only suggest you shoot it in and see if things "improved" which could certainly burn at least one bridge. I have never seen overlapping frames. For all the technology inside a film Leica it bears remembering it's technology of the 1920s. That's one reason the damn things last so long and can command the prices they do decades after their manufacture. Perhaps it's an oxymoron but I give them a certain Germanic élan. Do whatever feels best for you to do and lets you sleep at night.

s-a

Hi. semi-ambivalent,

thanks for your thoughts and suggestions.

I get what your saying about the Leicas being based on a design that has produced cameras that has outlived and out-performed most of its contemporaries. What a beautiful deigned camera that has stood the test of time. And that’s what made me decide to buy the M-A. And I also get what your saying about a camera designed back in the 1920s, might have been technologically advanced then but the same design may may throw up a few quirks compared to a ‘modern’ designed camera.

The problem is not in the M-A having narrower spacings between the frames of the negatives,  which is far smaller in width compared to the M7, but more importantly it is the inconsistency of the spacings where the spacings vsry significantly in width. There does not appear to be a common pattern where this occurs. It can occur anywhere on the negatives.

I will continue to use the M-A and see if it “grows” out if this problem. But I doubt it, as I adopted the same approach with the first M-A and it continued with the same problem.

But thank you again for you thoughts and comments. It is much appreciated.

Paul

[Paul Robinson]

7 hours ago, wattsy said:

Paul, my negs look like Harmen's colour ones – a consistent but fairly narrow gap.

Are you saying that your replacement M-A negs are noticeably irregularly spaced? Is this using the same lens? (Might be useful to remove at least one potential variable and run a roll of film with just a single lens). Have you watched the film wind with the base plate off? If you haven't, I think it would be worth losing a roll of film and doing exactly that because you may see some slippage or other odd behaviour going on as you wind the film.

Regarding the comments about MP versus M-A reliability, there may be some truth to that but I doubt there is any difference between MPs and M-As of recent build because they are built in batches by the same people in the same factory and both cameras use mostly the same parts. I can't imagine there is any difference in the wind mechanism between the two cameras. As such, I doubt there is much point acquiring a new MP to get around the present problem.

Obviously, it is worth waiting to hear back from Germany before making any drastic decisions but my guess is they will simply ask for the camera to be sent to them for examination. Wetzlar's stock answer to 'marginal' problems like this is a CLA but it might be worth going that route because you will end up with a camera that has been put (back) together with greater care than might be the case with a camera on the usual production line. You also have the two year warranty. If the camera gets worse or you simply find, over time, that the frame spacing is unacceptable, Leica will deal with it. In my experience, they can be slow but they are also very good at taking care of problems that arise (even with products where the warranty has long elapsed).

Hello Wattsy,

thanks for you reply.

I have followed much of what you suggested to take out any variables when comparing my M7 with the M-As. I have used a 35mm lens on all cameras. I load the film in the same way and have checked the cameras with and without a film.

Yes, I can confirm that the replacement M-A exhibits noticeably irregular spacings between the frames which can occur anywhere throughout the 36 exposure negative(s). So there is a definite problem with this camera model. And I have researched others who have experienced similar problems. Some with even greater problems, which are well documented on youtube, due to problems with film advancement between frames 10-15, where the film didn’t  advance at all! 

Thanks for your comments on my thoughts of exchanging the M-A for an MP. While I realise that these cameras are made in batches (and that’s why I had to wait a few months waiting for my new camera on back order). I had the feeling that there was an inherent problem with the M-A where problems occurred due to issues with film advancement. It was also confirmed in speaking to a number of well respected Leica dealers when looking to purchase the M-A. They said they had nothing but problems with the M-A but never with the MP! 

But as nice as the MP is and it has a great following with many who would advocate it over the M-A. It is the M-A that I want as a camera that replicates the early M cameras of old, which were the cameras of my youth. I wanted the M-A not just because it is a great camera, but also to coincide with my 60th birthday, with a camera brought our to celebrate 60 years of the Leica M cameras. And as a way to remember my father who first got me into photography in my youth and bought me my first 35mm camera. As I have just got back into photography, it was a camera to be used and at the same time have great sentimental value. My father would be pleased with such a camera to remember him. Maybe that’s why I just want this camera to be right! I just want to get on to photograph and enjoy it.

So I will have to be patient and just see what the  Leica people at Wetzlar make of it?

What a great forum of people who love Leica and who openly share their thoughts, experiences and helpfulness to others. It’s befn a great help. Thank you all 

Paul

[Paul Robinson]

6 hours ago, wattsy said:

I was thinking there might be some kind of stutter or other anomaly that might mark out some winds from others. It might be possible to also see if winding harder/faster or softer/slower makes any difference (obviously it shouldn't). The OP seems to suggest that the variable spacing is greater than a millimetre or less difference but I haven't seen his negs. 

I guess another question for the OP is whether the variable spacing is totally random or if there is a pattern – e.g. spacing becomes wider or narrower as the frame count goes up. My non-expert opinion is that a pattern would at least indicate something that could be adjusted. Totally random, variable spacing, who knows?

Hi Wattsy,

As my recent  reply to your previous post just mentions, there is no distinct pattern as to where it occurs. It appears totally random. I was hoping that there would be some form of pattern which would assist the experts at Leica to correlate with some mechanism problem.

Thanks again.

Paul

[Paul Robinson]

6 hours ago, MP2 said:

Forgive me, this might sound stupid. The Leica handbook says when loading  1) Advance the film by one frame using the quick wind lever and release the shutter. 2) Then tension the film by turning the rewind knob in the direction of red arrow. The film is properly wound if the rewind knob turns in the opposite direction to the arrow when the quick wind lever is operated again. Also the rewind release lever R must be in the vertical position. If still a problem return to Leica Germany!

Hi MP2,

Thanks. I have followed the instruction manual and use the M-A in the same way as my M7.

I prefer the M-A rewind knob to the M7 and especially to give the film some tension. But that’s just a minor preference on my part.

Paul

[Pyrogallol]

Buy a nice M4 instead and have it fully overhauled?

maybe Leitz should be forced to do a product recall, like cars or other products that turn out to have a fault regularly found.

personally I would hate to have one with very tight spacing as I print my negatives “Cartier Bresson “ style with the margins showing and I need a decent space between negatives.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Pyrogallol

[Paul Robinson]

4 hours ago, MP2 said:

I am making a very simple point  about any suspected camera faults - Read the hand book first!

Hi MP2,

Point taken and as my last reply post mentions...instruction manual followed to the letter...not that I usually refer to it having used the M7...but referred to it just in case it differed in any way...but the same as most film cameras I have used.

thanks,

Paul

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pico]

A note in passing. One reason we find many Leicas functional decades after their manufacture is the owners paid a lot of money for their cameras and were willing to send them in for a refresh or repair while other cameras were put away forever.  I miss the times where I could bring my M4s to a shop in Minneapolis or Chicago every year and have them back in a week. Typically, just over $100 each for the work and it included an expert review by the repair person. Long gone?