I recently purchased a Leica M4-2 in M- condition (ser. #1527xxx). I am satisfied with the price I paid. The camera was just serviced by Leica USA. I have the invoice from Leica as proof of it just being serviced. It has not been used since the CLA. Any of the typical M4-2 problems hopefully have been corrected by this CLA.

How does this camera compare to an M4P or M6 classic in terms of build quality and possible future reliability. I will be using this camera as my every-day camera. Remember, this camera just had a CLA by Leica USA and I am the first to use it since the CLA.

I did not want an M6,even though the M6 has a meter, because of even more cost cutting by Leica. I have owned four M6 classics and one M6ttl. The use of a hand held meter does not bother me as I already own an M4 and an used to having no built-in meter.

I'd like to hear your opinions on this matter. Thanks, :-)

-- Ron Snyder (STUDIO1401@AOL.COM), February 19, 2002

Answers

Ron. The cost cutting at Leitz started after the M4-M5 production (which ended in 1975), so it would also apply to thre M4-2. Based on my knowledge and handling of these cameras, I don't think there is much difference in solidity and build quality. I wouldn't base any decisions on such differences. One of the differences I am aware of is that is that in the earliest M4-2s, there was a condenser lens that increased the contrast of the rangefinder patch, which was removed during the production of the M4-2 and is not present in ALL successive models. Leica had determined that this is not necessary. There are some other very minor differences.

However, in terms of aesthetics and build quality, I distinguish two groups of cameras: 1) M3-M2-M4-M5; and 2) M4-2, M4-P, M6, M6TTL. Group I is better built.

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), February 19, 2002.

Just to add more fuel to the fire:

The Leica M4

The Leica M2

Sorry Ron, but if you're trying to avoid the cost-cutting measures (whatever they were) the M4-2 probably isn't the best bet according to some. My favorite M is the M2 with Quick Load kit installed. However from a practical standpoint (using the M professionally) I will never part with my Wetzlar M6s (two of them).

-- Anon Terry (anonht@yahoo.com), February 19, 2002.

I should probably try to qualify my answer - I use my M6s to shoot weddings professionally. Although I like the M2 because of its simplicity and reliability, neither of my Wetzlar M6s have ever failed on me, and the hotshoe and TTL meter speed up the process somewhat without being overly automating.

-- Anon Terry (anonht@yahoo.com), February 19, 2002.

Maybe my logic is flawed but I wouldn't be obsessively worried about a camera with no electronics that has survived 25 years and just had an overhaul by Leica (hopefully they didn't do anything to *lessen* its reliability!). I would be a *lot* more concerned with an M3 or M2 that hasn't been serviced in 25 years...or worse, has been fooled with by persons of unknown qualification. And I would have the greatest trepidations over one of the early-production M7's.

-- Jay (infinityst@aol.com), February 19, 2002.

Another subject that always crops up! I would re-classify as follows:

Group 1:M3-M2-M4-M5.

Group 2:M4-2, M4-P, M6 (classic).

Group 3:M6TTL and probably M7(this might have to go in group 4!).

See here for M4-2 notes

And here for more on Leica QC

My advice based on having owned two M4-2's and three M4-P's? - if like me you don't like in built meters then find a nice M4-P!

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 19, 2002.

I bought a black 50 cron last weekend in houston - yes, i'm back from russia - and the seller had an m4-2 for sale.

I was tempted because of price and my m4 shutter curtain is broken (got out a cle from storage for back-up).

one thing that bothered me was at 1/15 speed and lower (1/8, 1/4...) there was no clockwork/rebound sound, although the times seemed ok. the camera also had a "c" seal in the lens mount.

i did not buy.

i've always come to read/know from many sources that clockwork/rebound sounds are a way to inspect an m-camera. both my m4 and m6 makes these sounds. any of you have an m4-2 that you can try and report your findings?

-- chris chen (chrischen@msn.com), February 19, 2002.

Chris, the "C" means the camera was assembled in Canada from German parts. Since the "C" is still intact, it's probably not been tampered with. Yes, I agree the shutter sound at 1/15 and 1/30 tells you a lot about its health. Possibly nothing a CLA wouldn't fix, though, if the need for it were reflected in the purchase price. Excessive problems with the very earliest production range have been documented here in quite recent threads. I would check that by serial number. I'm away from my reference books right now, so I will let someone else supply that info, rather than trust to memory.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), February 19, 2002.

Late production M4-2 cameras should be good users. The early cameras, when they were just starting the Canadian production, were very hit and miss. I have an early camera and fortunately it is a good one. Unfortunately the last "CLA" was done by inexperienced people and that is now being sorted out. Unless you have a four leaf clover, I would stay away from early M4-2s.

As users there is no contest, a M4-2 or up camera with its hot shoe and ability to mount a winder is a more practical camera. As for something to look at...I do not know. The only thing I notice is that my cameras get worse looking over time but the negs still look great. Does anything else matter?

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), February 20, 2002.

Chris: An M4-2 shutter should sound like any other Leica-M shutter - the 'clockwork' is the same in all of them. Mine makes the rebound sounds.

Ron: An M4-2 should not be substantially different in reliability from a 4-P or a -6. There will be variation from camera to camera based on age and service history - but the 'flaws' in some M4-2s were mis- adjustments - precisely the kinds of things that would get corrected in a normal servicing anyway. A "new-in-box' M4-2 from, say, 1977 might be suspect - but if it's seen use the bugs either weren't there or already showed up and got fixed. An M4-P (at least the early ones) is just an M4-2 with extra framelines and a red dot. An early M6 is just an late M4-P with a meter (well sort of).

My M4-2 is also a 152xxxx. It had a grungy finder and some frame- spacing variation. I finally got a CLA once I dropped it and misaligned the RF - now it's actually in better shape than the M4-P, which DOES have some slow-speed quirks crying out for a servicing pretty soon.

The 4-2 is going to feel a little rugged compared to the M4 - steel gears were added for the motor wind so it'll never have quite the smoothness of a '60's camera. OTOH you get a hot shoe - and the M4 framelines and other similarities should allow them work well together in harness.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), February 20, 2002.