(a cross posting from the Leica-Users)

Well my new to me early M4-2 did a hick up or two and I decided to send it in for a check up to a REAL Leica tech. This is the last time I buy a camera that has been CLAed by someone I do not have full confidence in. So Gerry Smith phoned me yesterday and gave the good and bad news; all of which will be interesting to those of us who fight over the worth of the early M4-2 cameras.

Gerry started by saying that the camera was in good condition but needed a some cleaning and readjusting (sigh). He said it looked like someone who did not know what they were doing had set it up the last time. One of my concerns was that a RapidWinder would lock up when mounted on the camera. I thought it was the RW's coupling tangs catching in the screw holes in the copper plate under the camera's drive coupling. Gerry informed me the problem was that one of the drive gears had been put together one tooth out (!).

I also enquired about putting in the six frame mask set. Gerry said that my camera was an early one with the finder element (that was later deleted) right next to the mask assembly. He informed me that to put a six frame mask set in you have to remove this element and that owners sometimes complained afterwards the superimposed image would move (indicated focus point would change) as the eye moved. So he recommended that I let him try it out and only leave the six frame mask set in if it would work properly.

One interesting point is that my M4-2 finder flares just like my M6TTL finder does and this is with the extra element in. I had an newer M4-2 (second to last batch) and it did not flare at all. I think we can safely say that the flare is not caused by the presence or absence of the viewfinder element.

One other interesting point was Gerry's concern over my second shutter curtain which was starting to curl. Apparently this can cause a light leak that leaves a streak in the area of the film's perforations. Some thing to keep in mind if that ever happens to you.

Finally I must admit that all the complaints about SOME early M4-2s are accurate. Gerry said that the early cameras were subject to a very large sample variation; or, as he put it, some cameras were assembled on Mondays and Fridays. While my camera was a good one, except for previous bodging, he had recently spent THREE WHOLE DAYS adjusting one M4-2 to get it into spec.

So I guess the old advice to avoid early M4-2s is not poppycock after all. I am presently having Ralph Lauren tailor me a sack cloth suit. Ashes will follow shortly there after.

John Collier

PS: The really bad news for us Canadians is that the camera had been CLAed by Lisle-Kelco, our new distributor. Wait, it gets worse. Gerry is sixty years old and will be retiring soon....oh poop!

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), February 14, 2002

Answers

I've met Gerry on several occasions. A real nice "stand up" kinda guy. My 2 bodies are in there now (one for a chronic meter on problem, the other to check the curtain slit width after I tinkered with the shutter release point). Last I spoke to him he was still partial to his user M3s with the 50 Summicron DRs.

I guess there's a reason why Kindermann hasn't gotten around to my bodies yet...

;-)

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), February 14, 2002.

It is sad that Kindermann is no longer the Candian importer of Leica. Gerry Smith is great to deal with. I have been to Kindermann a couple of times to get a diopter and more recently an M6 eyepiece put on my M4-P, in both cases he checked out my camera and tweaked the rangefinder and checked my lenses. There was no charge, and he spent quite a bit of time on the checkup. It is going to be grim when he retires. There is another Leica repairman in Oakville who seems to know his stuff, but I don't know if he has access to as much of the measuring equipment that Gerry has, and that sort of equipment is cruical for precise setup.

-- Ian MacEachern (iwmac@sympatico.ca), February 14, 2002.

John: I recently ran across the original Pop. (or Mod.) Photography review of the M4-2 (from 1981 - they were a little slow off the mark for a 1977 camera).

One of the quotes Norman Goldberg(??) got from a private Leica repair man who inspected and adjusted the test sample: "Leica still builds a pretty good camera......once I'd finished it for them!"

M4-2s may not be M4s - but they ain't Bessa-Ts, either. At this point I'd probably check ANY 20-year-old camera very carefully before buying - 20 years of use/abuse/"repairs" can account for more variation than the weekday of original construction.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), February 14, 2002.

Interesting points John, especially coming from you and in the light of my (often raised!) rants about Leica QC (modern or otherwise).

I too had a very early M4-2 (some small component parts coming from the M4 parts bin) but mine worked perfectly unlike a later M4-P that was a definite 'Friday afternoon' job! Pleased to say my current M4- P is a 'middle of the week' special.

Did Gerry ever put a (M4) self-timer into a M4-2/P and do you know the cost? Presumably the bodyshell is the same, but maybe not the drivetrain (due to motor provision?)

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 15, 2002.

Just adding another vote to Gerry's tally. A couple of emergencies over the years in which I've gotten a camera back within as little as 3 days (distance from Edmonton to Toronto is 3000 mi). Extremely reasonable pricing compared to what I've heard of from others. But most importantly a true gentleman to deal with.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), February 15, 2002.

BOB,

HOW WOULD YOU KNOW WHAT A GENTLEMAN IS; IT TAKES ONE TO KNOW ONE!!!

BITTER CROTCH WE WILL never FORGET!!!

-- BITTER CROTCH (bitter crotch@arshole.com), February 15, 2002.

Supress that doormouse! Off with his whiskers!

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), February 15, 2002.