M4-P what are your thoughts?

David Murphy said:
I handled one once, and if I remember correctly it had 28mm frame lines which looked very convenient. My repair tech though tells me that in his opinion there are too many internal plastic gears in the camera compared to the Wetzlar M4. I'm sure the M4-P is a decent camera in the larger picture (the Wetzlar M4 is almost in a class almost of it's own mechanically - the price reflects that too). It seems to be reasonably priced by Leica M standards - maybe a bargain even.
Click to expand...
Well I thought he said plastic gears, but in any event he does not think too highly of the M4-P internal gearing compared to earlier Leica M - and although I believe him, the draw of a nice bright 28mm finder is pretty powerful as is the "low" price. The funny thing is my repair tech is not too opinionated about any cameras (and hardly a Leica fan), which is why I took note of his comments on the M4-P (he seems to enjoy Minolta SLR's if I can read him at all).

I have owned (briefly) a couple of good German M4's and they are worth every penny paid - maybe more - super special in my view.
 
Last edited:
For what it's worth, I prefer the uncluttered framelines of the M2.
The M2's build quality is not questioned.

But any screwmount or M Leica is a good camera.
 
Last edited:
FrankS said:
For what it's worth, I prefer the uncluttered framelines of the M2.
The M2's build quality is not questioned.

But any screwmount or M Leica is a good camera.
Click to expand...

In fact the build quality of the M4-P is also not questioned.

I use this camera for more than 20 years intensively; I never had technical problems with it. A very reliable camera the M4-P🙂
 
David Murphy said:
I handled one once, and if I remember correctly it had 28mm frame lines which looked very convenient. My repair tech though tells me that in his opinion there are too many internal plastic gears in the camera compared to the Wetzlar M4. I'm sure the M4-P is a decent camera in the larger picture (the Wetzlar M4 is almost in a class almost of it's own mechanically - the price reflects that too). It seems to be reasonably priced by Leica M standards - maybe a bargain even.
Click to expand...

Your repair tech doesn't know his M4-2 or M4-P very well, you might want to consider finding a repair tech that knows Leica M cameras a bit better. As others have noted, there are no plastic gears in the M4-P. They are steel rather than the brass gears of the M2, M3, & M4 so manual film advance doesn't feel quite as silky smooth as with the M2, M3, or M4 but the gears will last a lot longer on the M4-2 or M4-P. Leica changed to steel gears in order to handle the rather high torque of the M4-2/M4-P motor winder. If you've ever used an M4-2/M4-P motor winder you'll know why they switched to steel gears.
 
Last edited:
dbledsoe said:
Your repair tech doesn't know his M4-2 or M4-P very well, you might want to consider finding a repair tech that knows Leica M cameras a bit better. As others have noted, there are no plastic gears in the M4-P. They are steel rather than the brass gears of the M2, M3, & M4 so manual film advance doesn't feel quite as silky smooth as with the M2, M3, or M4 but the gears will last a lot longer on the M4-2 or M4-P. Leica changed to steel gears in order to handle the rather high torque of the M4-2/M4-P motor winder. If you've ever used an M4-2/M4-P motor winder you'll know why they switched to steel gears.
Click to expand...
Yes, well my repair tech is quite a pro thank you, with many factory certifications. I value his advice partly because he's not partial at all to Leica, in fact he has a rather dim view of the Leica SLR series (saved me from going down that road - at least for now). Note that I am myself favorably disposed to Leica. BTW, maybe Leica needed to put motor drives on rangefinders for marketing or customer driven reasons, but I'd never dream of operating a rangefinder with a motor drive - bad form - that's work for a Nikon F or F2 if film is favored.

To me one essential element of a rangefinder is how one can use them to silently (at a modest or slow pace) and thoughtfully compose and capture the subject under study. Motor work is massed produced and highly practical photography, in reality best done today with a digital SLR with zoom lenses anyway.
 
I owned an M winder for a while. IMO it completely defeated much of the point of the M body. The thing was fully as big as the camera and on the noisey side.
 
Last edited:
David Murphy said:
Yes, well my repair tech is quite a pro thank you, with many factory certifications. I value his advice partly because he's not partial at all to Leica, in fact he has a rather dim view of the Leica SLR series (saved me from going down that road - at least for now). Note that I am myself favorably disposed to Leica. BTW, maybe Leica needed to put motor drives on rangefinders for marketing or customer driven reasons, but I'd never dream of operating a rangefinder with a motor drive - bad form - that's work for a Nikon F or F2 if film is favored.

To me one essential element of a rangefinder is how one can use them to silently (at a modest or slow pace) and thoughtfully compose and capture the subject under study. Motor work is massed produced and highly practical photography, in reality best done today with a digital SLR with zoom lenses anyway.
Click to expand...

David,

I certainly didn't mean to offend you or your repair tech but by your own admission it appears your repair tech doesn't know Leica M4-2 or M4-P all that well if he says they have plastic gears in them. They don't. And I have no doubt he may be a whiz on lots of cameras, just not the M4-2 M4-P. And I never said one thing about the merits of motor drive on a Leica M, rather I was pointing out the reason Leica went to steel gears on the M4-2/M4-P... how you made a leap from that to the merits of a motor on an M camera escapes me, although I do happen to agree with you that a motor drive on an M camera to me isn't needed. But then again I am willing to bet that Leica didn't take the time and money to develop an M motor drive just for marketing reasons. Someone, Pro-photogs I suspect, asked for it. In those days Leica didn't do stuff just for "marketing" purposes.

>>To me one essential element of a rangefinder is how one can use them to silently (at a modest or slow pace) and thoughtfully compose and capture the subject under study.<<

That's coming from your perspective in today's world. When the Leica motor drive was being developed there were a lot of pros (photojournalists) still using the Leica M (for many and varied reasons) who wanted the ability to rip off a number of shots to capture a sequence of action (particularly on battlefields, or possibly protest/civil rights marches, etc.) faster than they felt they could by working the wind-on lever. You need to think back to those days rather than in terms of what you think a rangefinder is best suited for in today's world (i.e., your perception of slow thoughtful silent capture).
 
JNewell said:
I owned an M winder for a while. IMO it completely defeated much of the point of the M body. The thing was fully as big as the camera and on the noisey side.
Click to expand...

That is from your point of view. Were you a photojournalist in the period that the M winder was developed?

I know how big the "Thing" is, I have one.

Understand the era it was developed in and the intended audience. All of you seem to have missed that.
 
I have an M4-P that is as smooth as the M3, M2, M4, M5 and MP3 that I own. In fact, it may be smoother than them all. What I don't like is the view finder that flares in back light, although I understand it can be fixed not to do so.

/T
 
Tuolumne said:
I have an M4-P that is as smooth as the M3, M2, M4, M5 and MP3 that I own. In fact, it may be smoother than them all. What I don't like is the view finder that flares in back light, although I understand it can be fixed not to do so.

/T
Click to expand...

Smoothness is somewhat personal. I agree in that I have owned a number of M cameras over the years that I felt were smooth (I like to think in terms of silky) i.e., the M/2/M3/M4's I have owned but other folks may be of a very different opinion in that regard. I trace that to my experience, or lack there of, of not spending years and years with each particular camera to come to know/feel the subtle difference, but I have no doubt it is there. Be that as it may, the M2/M3/M4's I have owned/handled over the years were a tad smoother (think silky feeling) than the M4-2/P's I have owned, but only in terms of wind on, and that very subtle i.e., most other folks would not feel the difference without a lot of trying of each.

But none of that responds to the OP's claim that his camera tech says that Leica M4-2/P's have plastic gears. That claim is BS! And I will repeat my statement that his camera tech doesn't know squat about Leica M cameras because the M4-2/M4-P have no plastic gears... so please, let us get back to the OP's claim and forget any other claims about Leica M cameras. I repeat, the OP's camera tech claimed that the Leica M4-2/P has plastic gears. They do not!

Don
 
dbledsoe said:
That is from your point of view. Were you a photojournalist in the period that the M winder was developed?

I know how big the "Thing" is, I have one.

Understand the era it was developed in and the intended audience. All of you seem to have missed that.
Click to expand...
Don, I don't know about JNewell, but I *was* around in that era (actually a little before it), and I *was* involved in photo journalism, mostly from the 16mm spot television news side, but even a bit of still work. I was often in the company of still photographers and while I was usually too busy to gander at their cameras I can't remember anything in use other than Nikons (all F's as I recall), and a lot of them had motor drives. I did know one film camera man who had a Pentax, but he was basically a film stringer who kept it as a side tool to make extra money selling stills if the chance arose.

I'll check with my tech on the plastic gears and see what he says - I've never taken an M4-P apart myself. I know at least two models of Canon rangefinders have some plastic gear problems - the VI-L is one of them - I think these have to do with film counter wheels. Plastic gears are not necessarily bad, it depends on how much torque they are transmitting.
 
Last edited:
David Murphy said:
Don, I don't know about JNewell, but I *was* around in that era (actually a little before it), and I *was* involved in photo journalism, mostly from the 16mm spot television news side, but even a bit of still work. I was often in the company of still photographers and while I was usually too busy to gander at their cameras I can't remember anything in use other than Nikons (all F's as I recall), and a lot of them had motor drives. I did know one film camera man who had a Pentax, but he was basically a film stringer who kept it as a side tool to make extra money selling stills if the chance arose.

I'll check with my tech on the plastic gears and see what he says - I've never taken an M4-P apart myself. I know at least two models of Canon rangefinders have some plastic gear problems - the VI-L is one of them - I think these have to do with film counter wheels. Plastic gears are not necessarily bad, it depends on how much torque they are transmitting.
Click to expand...

David,

I agree that the Nikon F was king in that era (the era of the M4-2/M4-P i.e., the late mid/late 70's/early 80's) but there were still PJ's using the M system. Because you didn't see them, or those around you didn't use M cameras, doesn't mean they weren't in use by PJ's.

Be that as it may, my point remains the M4-2/M4-P did not use plastic gears. I believe the plastic gear rumor came about with the later production M6 Leica but only with regards to the frame counter gear, but I have no proof of that in that it was a rumor circulated around the Internet. All of my M6 Leica cameras have been early production units, with one venture into the M6 .85 viewfinder magnification model that I sold not long after I bought it new.

I would be interested to hear why or for what reason your camera tech steered you clear of the Leica SLR system.

Best regards,

Don
 
Pablito said:
I think mine has wooden gears - mahogany. It's from that brief secret period that Leica was manufacturing in Honduras.
Click to expand...

Ohooo YES! I know the period well. It was in the time that Leica hired whittlers, from all points north, south, east, and west and relocated them to Honduras, later to Wetzlar. You could tell that era M camera by the smokey smell of the wind on as one used the camera speedily... I think that ushered in the age of Speedy Gonzales (Chief wood carver) and helped to make him famous around the world.

Rare cameras indeed. I miss that smokey smell...
 
dbledsoe said:
That is from your point of view. Were you a photojournalist in the period that the M winder was developed?

I know how big the "Thing" is, I have one.

Understand the era it was developed in and the intended audience. All of you seem to have missed that.
Click to expand...

Not a PJ and that is the one case that might have changed my feelings - though I am pretty darned fast with the manual wind. However, to push back a little in a friendly way, the era that it was developed was the late 70s/early 80s. It comes close (I can hear the howls 😀 ) to turning an M4-P into an F3. 😱
 
Heh heh...

Around in that era? Been shooting Leica Ms since 1972. So, yeah, I was around in that era. I've owned every M model except (!) an M2, multiple copies of most, and most lenses, over the years.

David Murphy said:
Don, I don't know about JNewell, but I *was* around in that era (actually a little before it), and I *was* involved in photo journalism, mostly from the 16mm spot television news side, but even a bit of still work. I was often in the company of still photographers and while I was usually too busy to gander at their cameras I can't remember anything in use other than Nikons (all F's as I recall), and a lot of them had motor drives. I did know one film camera man who had a Pentax, but he was basically a film stringer who kept it as a side tool to make extra money selling stills if the chance arose.

I'll check with my tech on the plastic gears and see what he says - I've never taken an M4-P apart myself. I know at least two models of Canon rangefinders have some plastic gear problems - the VI-L is one of them - I think these have to do with film counter wheels. Plastic gears are not necessarily bad, it depends on how much torque they are transmitting.
Click to expand...
 
Be that as it may, my point remains the M4-2/M4-P did not use plastic gears. I believe the plastic gear rumor came about with the later production M6 Leica but only with regards to the frame counter gear, but I have no proof of that in that it was a rumor circulated around the Internet.
Click to expand...

You are correct on all points. Technically, IIRC, that isn't even true of the actual gearing on the M6 frame counter, only its mounting. I could be misremembering the details on that.

The drive gears were brass then transitioned to steel.
 
JNewell said:
You are correct on all points. Technically, IIRC, that isn't even true of the actual gearing on the M6 frame counter, only its mounting. I could be misremembering the details on that.

The drive gears were brass then transitioned to steel.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly why I said I think it was an Internet rumor (re: M6 and plastic gear/frame counter).

So let me back up a bit and say this; I love my M6 and M4-P that have no plastic gears and operate super smoothly. I just wish I had more time these days to use them.

Best regards,
Don
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom