Leica MP backdoor loose

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, howareyoukk said:

 

if I am understanding this correctly, the movement I felt when lightly applying some pressure on the bottom of the back door, even with the base plate attached to the door, is generated from the spring on the pressure plate? 

see post #4

Andy's post was a very good explanation of why the pressure plate and door need to have some self adjusting tolerance for different films. You can hopefully say that instead of the cheap feeling poor fit and bad craftsmanship in your pricey camera which Leica need to fix it is now a perfect example of quality engineering that is worth every penny?

[adan]

2 hours ago, howareyoukk said:

f I am understanding this correctly, the movement I felt when lightly applying some pressure on the bottom of the back door, even with the base plate attached to the door, is generated from the spring on the pressure plate? 

Yep. Newton's Third Law - equal and opposite reaction.

The (leaf) springs are sandwiched between the back and the pressure plate. You can squish the back in a bit and the springs take up the force.

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||      Back                          
\        V             {          V           }          V            /      springs and pressure plate 
===============================       film

This shows the leaf springs backing a Nikon film pressure plate - the M Leica back looks and works about the same (if you dare take it apart).

https://uscamera.com/product/nikon-1b001755-film-pressure-plate/

[plaidshirts]

For what it's worth, none of my M bodies do this except for the M4 which only does that on one corner. It bothers me a bit but there's no light leak so I'm trying to get over it.

My MP is rock solid all the way around the back door.

[howareyoukk]

10 hours ago, plaidshirts said:

For what it's worth, none of my M bodies do this except for the M4 which only does that on one corner. It bothers me a bit but there's no light leak so I'm trying to get over it.

My MP is rock solid all the way around the back door.

That’s weird then….that kinda against the pressure plate theory outlined by another forum member. Perhaps some mechanical tolerance   in parts? 

[250swb]

4 hours ago, howareyoukk said:

That’s weird then….that kinda against the pressure plate theory outlined by another forum member. Perhaps some mechanical tolerance   in parts? 

"Confirmation bias (also confirmatory bias, myside bias,^[a] or congeniality bias^[2]) is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values.^[3] People display this bias when they select information that supports their views, ignoring contrary information or when they interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing attitudes. The effect is strongest for desired outcomes, for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs." - Wikipedia

You are assuming that a solid rear door is normal, but maybe that is the type that needs fixing? You are also assuming both states can't be correct, some cameras do and some don't and neither needs fixing. The reason given for a springy rear door is to explain it isn't a problem, not that all cameras would be the same, and it may depend on other things anyway, a film in the camera compresses the pressure plate spring meaning there is something to press against and when there isn't a film loaded it may feel solid.

People like to create problems but are limited by what they can see and touch and if it doesn't match prior expectations they feel it needs fixing because they lack a basic knowledge of what springs and things are meant to do. So a springy rear door or a solid one may only be down to microns of mechanical tolerance or one spring being very slightly stronger or weaker than another, but the tolerance that is causing the 'problem' is confirmation bias. 

[SudaliuS]

Issues like that push me think about keeping my IIIf and not spend money to M film cameras...😌

Edited June 27 by SudaliuS

[StephenH]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, SudaliuS said:

Issues like that push me think about keeping my IIIf and not spend money to M film cameras...😌

Excellent decision.  With its monocoque construction it seems to be less susceptible to the plethora of light leaks that plague M cameras and at least in my opinion, it's separate rangefinder is far more accurate and easier to use than the new-fangled combined viewfinder/rangefinder of the Ms.  I wish there were a grass roots movement to bring the IIIf back, its far more deserving of an encore than the M6.  

[250swb]

3 hours ago, SudaliuS said:

Issues like that push me think about keeping my IIIf and not spend money to M film cameras...😌

It’s amazing how idiosyncrasies become ‘issues’ in the modern age, have you ever considered a simple proposition, does it work or doesn’t it? Because Leica decided the IIIf had issues and made the more sophisticated IIIg, but do we trash the IIIf, no of course not because most photographers are grown up enough not to invent a mountain out of a mole hill.

Edited June 27 by 250swb

[LocalHero1953]

Just now, StephenH said:

Excellent decision.  With its monocoque construction it seems to be less susceptible to the plethora of light leaks that plague M cameras and at least in my opinion, it's separate rangefinder is far more accurate and easier to use than the new-fangled combined viewfinder/rangefinder of the Ms.  I wish there were a grass roots movement to bring the IIIf back, its far more deserving of an encore than the M6.  

They were not strong bodies. Malcolm Taylor manually 'straightened' one of my Barnacks (i.e. twisted it back in his own - expert - hands). Barnacks were made of thinner metal and vulnerable to such distortion. Ms were made of heavier duty stuff, presumably at least partly because they did include a rear door.

[howareyoukk]

9 hours ago, SudaliuS said:

Issues like that push me think about keeping my IIIf and not spend money to M film cameras...😌

To be fair, apart from the looseness of the film door on the bottom left, my mp has been functioning without any other faults. I have been browsing online and asking on foreign forums, since English is not the only language I speak, the answers I have obtained are some have movements with the film door and some don’t. The ratio might be half & half?
 

If I were to make a suggestion, I would say maybe get a second hand m6 from a reputable seller? 

On the other hand, it’s a great camera. I paid a premium for it since I wanted to be the sole owner of the camera and make many personal projects and grow with it. It’s just a bit disappointing that some component on my camera has a higher tolerance than I would like. It’s like you are getting a brand new Porsche 911 at a premium price and there are some interior rattlings that fall within the specifications, as the dealership would inform you if taking the car there.

 I will just accept this as a quirk of the camera, considering many others I spoke with on foreign forums have the same problem with their m film cameras. I have been / will continue to make personal projects with it.