Brand new MP/M-A/M6 film scratches [Merged]

[LuckySquirrel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Okay so I just did a test following these procedures and here were the findings:

1. Load new roll of film and keep back cover closed (pressure plate holding film down)
2. Shoot 10 shots
3. Remove base plate, open up back cover (pressure plate not holding film down), attach base plate
4. Shoot 10 shots
5. Remove base plate, close up back cover (pressure plate holding film down), attach base plate
6. Shoot 10 shots
7. Rewind (with back cover closed and pressure plate holding down the film)

Here were my findings:

• For the first 10 shots, I have the same scratches I was seeing before on the cell side of the film. They were on what I will refer to as the "bottom" of the film strip here since when the camera is oriented upright, that's the side of the film scratched. No scratches on the "top" of the film strip.
• For the second 10 shots, I don't see any of the scratches on the "bottom" of the film strip, but DO see a new scratch on the "top" of the film strip (which I could see as it was happening since the back was opened...and it was being caused by the film coming into contact with the underside of the bridge that has the electrical contacts)
• For the third 10 shots, the "top" scratch went away (presumably since the pressure plate helped make sure the film wasn't coming into contact with the bridge) and the "bottom scratches" were back (indicating the pressure plate is causing these)

I think the interesting thing to me here though is that the "bottom" scratches (from the pressure plate) went away even though I rewound the film with the back cover closed. Maybe it's the leading edge of the pressure plate (leading as in the first edge the film comes into contact with when it is being advanced through the frames) that potentially has something just sharp enough to cause the scratches? Or potentially it's some sort of directional anomaly, etc. somewhere on the pressure plate causing this?

I'm really not too sure, but may wipe down the pressure plate with another lens wipe and sacrifice yet another roll of film to do the same test with the back open on rewind to see what results I get :).

[Mikep996]

"not bad considering there’s sometimes been advice on the forum that M’s need a CLA every two or three years"

My 1984 M6 has never had a CLA and shows no sign that it needs one.   Clearly, as you suggested, a CLA shop/person is recommending that.  Never had any camera CLA'd.  IMO, a camera needs a CLA typically because it's been sitting around on a shelf as opposed to being regularly used.  Like any mechanical device, the worst thing for it is to NOT be used.

Edited February 2, 2023 by Mikep996

[LuckySquirrel]

Update:

Same procedure as above, except for step 7 I had the back cover opened (pressure plate not holding down the film) and the bottom plate on. Same findings overall. Prior to the test I used a lens wipe to clean the pressure plate (including the edges) and tried to use a separate lens wipe to wipe "under" the bridge with the electrical contacts. It may just be my imagination, but it seemed like the scratches were maybe slightly more faint (or maybe it's just my mind seeing what I want it to see at this point 🥲).

[comte de Mazan]

10 hours ago, aesop said:

 

       ...sorry to contradict you, but the MP was introduced in 2003. Oh, and Leica had already launched the Digilux long before then.

 

...Sorry to contradict you... my MP N° 2890780 was built in 2002 even he was introduced in 2003. The Digilux was developed in partnership with Fuji Camera, the Digilux 1 was developed in partnership with Panasonic.

[LuckySquirrel]

Okay I just took out the loupes again and also brought out a clean microfiber cloth to see if I could get it to "snag" on anything. What is this piece here? It looks to be on a very similar plane as the pressure plate and seems to have a little rougher of a surface finish (when felt via the microfiber and viewed through a 10x loupe). Does this come into contact with the film at all?

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!

[250swb]

1 hour ago, Emtsoh said:

Testing a new film camera is a good idea. Better to check in the store instead wasting some good shots/negatives/prints later.

It comes back to the point of how do you test it in-store without turning a new camera into a secondhand camera? Would you be willing to buy a new car that somebody else had tested first? I wouldn’t want to buy a Leica where the outer box had been opened, never mind somebody else buggering about with it. 

[LuckySquirrel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 minutes ago, 250swb said:

It comes back to the point of how do you test it in-store without turning a new camera into a secondhand camera? Would you be willing to buy a new car that somebody else had tested first? I wouldn’t want to buy a Leica where the outer box had been opened, never mind somebody else buggering about with it. 

Most "new" cars on dealer lots have been test-driven, etc. Almost none have 0 miles when you read the odometer, but I completely agree with you about wanting to have a new & unused camera.

[250swb]

11 hours ago, aesop said:

 

       ...sorry to contradict you, but the MP was introduced in 2003. Oh, and Leica had already launched the Digilux long before then.

 

I’m sorry but while the first MP were built in 2002 the first deliveries were mostly in 2003. Mine was from the first batch and I only received it in February 2003 in the U.K. I’m guessing that not all deliveries and serial numbered cameras happened in exactly a sequential order, but the first MP’s were 2002.

[250swb]

4 minutes ago, LuckySquirrel said:

Most "new" cars on dealer lots have been test-driven, etc. Almost none have 0 miles when you read the odometer, but I completely agree with you about wanting to have a new & unused camera.

It’s called ‘delivery mileage’ not ‘showroom demonstrator’. To expand upon this there was often a debate about the shutter actuations of a digital Leica, like ‘how can there be 500 shutter actuations showing on my new camera, is it a dealers demonstrator?’ No, it was the camera going through the testing and adjusting QC tests by Leica. Same for a car, they drive it from the factory, onto a transporter to the dealer where it gets its final fettle, and it gets some mileage on it.

Edited February 2, 2023 by 250swb

[LuckySquirrel]

4 minutes ago, 250swb said:

It’s called ‘delivery mileage’ not ‘showroom demonstrator’.

And I guess they all drove themselves around, no one had to be behind the wheel (which I get is a possibility with autonomous vehicles). Regardless, I will concede my friend. You are correct and you showed me. The onus is not on the manufacturer to create a working product. I should have done more testing and RCA on my behalf. Thank you for helping me understand 🙄.

[charlesphoto99]

On 2/1/2023 at 7:44 AM, LuckySquirrel said:

 

There are some NOS M6s that I've seen pop up on eBay (that say they have a CLA) from Japan that are pretty tempting at this point. I've looked at this forum classifieds, B&H, Adorama, Keh, Used Photo Pro, Camera West, Popflash, MPB, Tamarkin, Leica Miami, & Classic Connection multiple times over the past few weeks but I haven't found anything that are as clean as a NOS item except on eBay. Would it be a bad idea to go this route?

I would be very wary of those so called Japanese CLA's. From some of the pictures of various gear that tout that I've seen, it looked like anything but. MAP might be the best bet though if I were to buy from Japan. 

[Emtsoh]

27 minutes ago, 250swb said:

It comes back to the point of how do you test it in-store without turning a new camera into a secondhand camera? Would you be willing to buy a new car that somebody else had tested first? I wouldn’t want to buy a Leica where the outer box had been opened, never mind somebody else buggering about with 

Why not doing this?:

We pay for the new camera in the store. Open the box, test the film.

All is fine: We leave with the camera.

Scratches or anything else is wrong: We return the camera and ask politely for refund.

The store has to take care of repairing the faulty camera or use it as a demo piece. 

Sounds fair for the price we pay for a new film M body/lenses.

[250swb]

2 minutes ago, Emtsoh said:

Why not doing this?:

We pay for the new camera in the store. Open the box, test the film.

All is fine: We leave with the camera.

Scratches or anything else is wrong: We return the camera and ask politely for refund.

The store has to take care of repairing the faulty camera or use it as a demo piece. 

Sounds fair for the price we pay for a new film M body/lenses.

It's only applicable if you assume you have a God given right to buy the camera in the first place. With an attitude like yours how long would it be before Leica vetted potential customers just like Ferrari and other top brands do now? Do you think you are going to test drive your brand new Ferrari and then say 'no'?

[Manunagra5]

54 minutes ago, 250swb said:

It comes back to the point of how do you test it in-store without turning a new camera into a secondhand camera? Would you be willing to buy a new car that somebody else had tested first? I wouldn’t want to buy a Leica where the outer box had been opened, never mind somebody else buggering about with it. 

BUY > TEST 

If scratches, replace immediately or money back, if no scratches, you can go home with the camera! 

So simple in fact. If a camera is doing scratches, we can't consider it as new or second hand, it's just a unfinished camera that Leica couldn't sell. It's really strange to see here people protecting Leica.  What i m understanding now is that people here are all experts who already have cameras. Next people who will buy leica film camera will spend a lot of time on youtube whatching reviews. The war against the incompetence of Leica in the film domain will take place on youtube! Leica could lost a lot of purchases if potential buyers knew that.

My Leica, after repair in Germany is back with more scratches than before so i'll go te the store tomorrow to ask for my money back.

 

Edited February 2, 2023 by Manunagra5

[250swb]

2 minutes ago, Manunagra5 said:

BUY > TEST 

If scratches, replace immediately or money back, if no scratches, you can go home with the camera! 

 

Yes, buy and test, simple in consumer law, nobody is arguing against that.

[Emtsoh]

5 minutes ago, Manunagra5 said:

BUY > TEST 

If scratches, replace immediately or money back, if no scratches, you can go home with the camera! 

So simple in fact. If a camera is doing scratches, we can't consider it as new or second hand, it's just a unfinished camera. What i m understanding now is that people here are all experts who already have cameras. Next people who will buy leica film camera will spend a lot of time on youtube whatching reviews. The war against the incompetence of Leica in the film domain will take place on youtube! Leica could lost a lot of purchases if potential buyers knew that.

My Leica, after repair in Germany is back with more scratches than before so i'll go te the store tomorrow to ask for my money back.

Spot on. 

First buy and test.

We do have the right (not attitude..) to return a faulty product - expensive or cheap. 

[Huss]

1 hour ago, Manunagra5 said:

..

My Leica, after repair in Germany is back with more scratches than before so i'll go te the store tomorrow to ask for my money back.

 

I think they thought you might like it customized like a Lenny Kravitz Reporter edition for free.  For your troubles.

[Huss]

2 hours ago, LuckySquirrel said:

Okay I just took out the loupes again and also brought out a clean microfiber cloth to see if I could get it to "snag" on anything. What is this piece here? It looks to be on a very similar plane as the pressure plate and seems to have a little rougher of a surface finish (when felt via the microfiber and viewed through a 10x loupe). Does this come into contact with the film at all?

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!

I checked my MP and it looks like that comes into contact but only by the sprocket teeth - to make sure the film is seated on the sprockets.  It does not look like it would touch the picture image part of the film.

[LocalHero1953]

26 minutes ago, Huss said:

I checked my MP and it looks like that comes into contact but only by the sprocket teeth - to make sure the film is seated on the sprockets.  It does not look like it would touch the picture image part of the film.

I looked at that piece on my new MP (which doesn’t scratch) and couldn’t envisage it contacting the film unless there was no tension at the take-up spool end. 

i have just looked at it again, shining a light into the base of the camera with the back pressed closed. Those two bits of metal do not get closer to the film than the points of the sprockets (in my camera anyway), and the film should be kept tight on the sprockets during advancing. When I get time I’ll load my wasted film again and see how the tension changes during advancing and, later, releasing the clutch to rewind. 

Edited February 2, 2023 by LocalHero1953

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[LuckySquirrel]

25 minutes ago, Huss said:

I checked my MP and it looks like that comes into contact but only by the sprocket teeth - to make sure the film is seated on the sprockets.  It does not look like it would touch the picture image part of the film.

 

Just now, LocalHero1953 said:

I looked that piece on my new MP (which doesn’t scratch) and couldn’t envisage it contracting the film unless there was no tension at the take-up spool end. 

i have just looked at it again, shining a light into the base of the camera with the back pressed closed. Those two bits of metal do not get closer to the film than the points of the sprockets (in my camera anyway), and the film should be kept tight on the sprockets during advancing. When I get time I’ll load my wasted film again and see how the tension changes during advancing and, later, releasing the clutch to rewind. 

Awesome, thank you both for checking! It was a long shot, but I can't see what on the pressure plate is causing the scratching at all so was just grasping at this point.