Just watched these two videos.

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Some interesting comparisons between most, if not all of the Leica M film cameras.

 

[kivis]

What is your take from these two video's?

[Guest]

@kivis just interesting to see the evolution of the film M cameras. I’ve never seen a video that shows the differences before.  Thought others might be interested to see the videos too.

Too be honest they’re pretty much the same, just newer technology and materials   

What’s your take?

Edited August 7, 2022 by OThomas

[colint544]

My take is that he knows those cameras inside out, and he's a good salesman. Brimming with enthusiasm. It's masterful the way he glosses over any downsides, especially with the M4-2/P M5, and CL.

[hdmesa]

On 8/13/2022 at 6:09 AM, colint544 said:

My take is that he knows those cameras inside out, and he's a good salesman. Brimming with enthusiasm. It's masterful the way he glosses over any downsides, especially with the M4-2/P M5, and CL.

What are the downsides of the M4-P that cause it to make your list? It was built to a higher standard than the M4-2, and many of them have brass top plates. M4-P is not much different than a modern M-A, especially if an MP finder upgrade is added.

[250swb]

10 hours ago, hdmesa said:

What are the downsides of the M4-P that cause it to make your list? It was built to a higher standard than the M4-2, and many of them have brass top plates. M4-P is not much different than a modern M-A, especially if an MP finder upgrade is added.

I can't think of any downsides either, and the later M4-P were exactly the same as an M6 except without a meter so if there are downsides this would logically include the M6 range. I think in many ways the M4-P, like the M5, was highly engineered in Leica's attempt to woo back professionals, certainly with the internals of the M4-P being robust enough to take a motor drive. The M4-2 was a filler in the range but not a bad camera, and the CL a collaboration with Minolta and hardly a Leica at all, nevertheless it also isn't a bad camera..

[colint544]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

13 hours ago, hdmesa said:

What are the downsides of the M4-P that cause it to make your list? It was built to a higher standard than the M4-2, and many of them have brass top plates. M4-P is not much different than a modern M-A, especially if an MP finder upgrade is added.

Whoops, not meaning to incur any ire! Perhaps 'downsides' is too strong a word. I mean, really, you couldn't put a cigarette paper between the various M models. They're all good, dependable workhorses. I have an M5 myself, and I'm aware of the criticisms some people dish out to it. Too big, too ugly, battery is obsolete, etc. I also had an M6 for many years, and I found the occasional white-out of the rangefinder patch a bit annoying, especially as I knew it was down to cost-cutting (a missing optic in the rangefinder) which caused it.

I guess it's really the bit in the video where he talks about how 'cool' and 'fun' the little disc on the back door of the M4-P or M4-2 is. You can slice that feature any way you like, but it was clearly, if not exactly a downside,  a cost-cutting measure by Leica, compared to the elaborate engraved and sprung metal disc that went before. He also says the period of the M5 and CL was just Leica having a bit of fun but then they went back to the traditional M shape. If anyone is curious about the history of the Leica M, it's possibly interesting to know why these design decisions were made. The company was fighting for its survival at the time, and the M5 and CL were serious attempts to compete with Canon and Nikon. The reasons why they abandoned these designs are even more interesting. As we know.

I like the guy in the video. He's a salesman, and he brilliantly emphasises the features of each camera. 

Edited August 18, 2022 by colint544

[hdmesa]

4 hours ago, colint544 said:

Whoops, not meaning to incur any ire! Perhaps 'downsides' is too strong a word. I mean, really, you couldn't put a cigarette paper between the various M models. They're all good, dependable workhorses. I have an M5 myself, and I'm aware of the criticisms some people dish out to it. Too big, too ugly, battery is obsolete, etc. I also had an M6 for many years, and I found the occasional white-out of the rangefinder patch a bit annoying, especially as I knew it was down to cost-cutting (a missing optic in the rangefinder) which caused it.

I guess it's really the bit in the video where he talks about how 'cool' and 'fun' the little disc on the back door of the M4-P or M4-2 is. You can slice that feature any way you like, but it was clearly, if not exactly a downside,  a cost-cutting measure by Leica, compared to the elaborate engraved and sprung metal disc that went before. He also says the period of the M5 and CL was just Leica having a bit of fun but then they went back to the traditional M shape. If anyone is curious about the history of the Leica M, it's possibly interesting to know why these design decisions were made. The company was fighting for its survival at the time, and the M5 and CL were serious attempts to compete with Canon and Nikon. The reasons why they abandoned these designs are even more interesting. As we know.

I like the guy in the video. He's a salesman, and he brilliantly emphasises the features of each camera. 

For what it's worth, I don't like the rear dial on my M-A, either – difficult to push/turn and almost impossible to line up to an ISO number exactly, which flips my OCD from mild to strong

 

[250swb]

9 hours ago, colint544 said:

I guess it's really the bit in the video where he talks about how 'cool' and 'fun' the little disc on the back door of the M4-P or M4-2 is. You can slice that feature any way you like, but it was clearly, if not exactly a downside,  a cost-cutting measure by Leica, compared to the elaborate engraved and sprung metal disc that went before.

Cost cutting compared to what? Notating the disc with a wax pencil for what film you have in the camera and how it is rated, or just a dumb '400 ASA' setting on a dial, which in the day could mean almost any film manufacturers product. M Leica's have never had a film reminder window to slot the tab the end of the box into, and on which photographers would write any different ISO ratings from standard. I guess in the day the professional would have liked a film reminder window to go along with their Nikons or Canons, but criticising something that is more useful, less intrusive in the overall design than a reminder window, AND cheaper is taking the wrong lesson out of design decisions.

[Jeff S]

I liked his dad, Stan, better when the business was in NY.  Dan is definitely more the salesman.

Jeff

[colint544]

39 minutes ago, 250swb said:

Cost cutting compared to what? Notating the disc with a wax pencil for what film you have in the camera and how it is rated, or just a dumb '400 ASA' setting on a dial, which in the day could mean almost any film manufacturers product. M Leica's have never had a film reminder window to slot the tab the end of the box into, and on which photographers would write any different ISO ratings from standard. I guess in the day the professional would have liked a film reminder window to go along with their Nikons or Canons, but criticising something that is more useful, less intrusive in the overall design than a reminder window, AND cheaper is taking the wrong lesson out of design decisions.

Fair enough, buddy. I'm out. I spend too much time on this forum, and need the occasional reminder, so cheers for that.

[250swb]

10 minutes ago, colint544 said:

Fair enough, buddy. I'm out. I spend too much time on this forum, and need the occasional reminder, so cheers for that.

Well you don't need to flounce off just because of me. I was buying and using the very Leica cameras that people are now over analysing and saying they are no good compared with this, that, or the other. And nobody then gave a damn, they just got on and used them because that is what the Leica dealer stocked. Sure everybody can have preferences, but there is an overrefined and ineffectual snobbishness that can be picked up by trawling the Internet without thinking that maybe one day in the past an M4-2 earned some photographers their wages. And that is a practical assessment of the quality of a camera. 

[LocalHero1953]

58 minutes ago, colint544 said:

Fair enough, buddy. I'm out. I spend too much time on this forum, and need the occasional reminder, so cheers for that.

I’d be sorry if you stopped posting - I’d much rather read your posts and see your photos than those that appear to come from a lifetime of chewing on lemons. 

[colint544]

4 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I’d be sorry if you stopped posting - I’d much rather read your posts and see your photos than those that appear to come from a lifetime of chewing on lemons. 

Thanks! I'm not stopping posting, was just sort of done with that particular exchange. It reminded me that we're all together on this ball of rock and metal, hurtling through space, and that very little really matters. I've made actual friends on this forum, and it's a great font of knowledge and enthusiasm. When all is said and done, we're just photography enthusiasts, and that's the important thing on here.