Love my M2 !!!

Maybe there is some magic to the M2! Somehow, there is less "stuff" to contend with. You just stick a 35 on it, load it and shoot. No fiddling with dials, no "extra" frames to be confused by - just pure photographic joy. It is truly a minimalist camera. Exposures can be guessed, it is easy to hyper focal shoot it. Few things to go wrong - and they tend to last a long long time. After a while a M2 just slips in to your hand and fits it. Instincts take over. You will often find yourself getting ready to shoot and finding out that you have the shot already - pure instinct.
 
Ever since I got my M2 all my other cameras have been seriously neglected... my Canon digital line up has been relegated to paying gigs only... my TLR's sit on the shelf... and my R3A has seen almost zero action. I'm so in love with the viewfinder of the M2 that I'm thinking of selling my R3A to fund a second. I thought shooting without a meter would be a pain... I used the Leica MR meter that came with the M2 for about 4 days... now I double check my exposures once in a while with a handheld meter but for the most part just guestimate... and the weirdest thing is my exposures have gotten BETTER, especially the ones at night which is exactly the opposite of what I would have thought.

One question... I've seen so many beautiful shots of aged and brassed black paint M's... but I can't seem to find any pics of similarly abused chrome ones... did pro's just not shoot chromes and as such they just didn't see as much use as the black paints? I just want to know what my chrome M2 will look like 30 years from now so I have something else to look forward to :)

 
Last edited:
Disaster_Area said:
One question... I've seen so many beautiful shots of aged and brassed black paint M's... but I can't seem to find any pics of similarly abused chrome ones... did pro's just not shoot chromes and as such they just didn't see as much use as the black paints? I just want to know what my chrome M2 will look like 30 years from now so I have something else to look forward to :)
Click to expand...

I wonder the same thing about my chrome M2, but it's 48 years old now and looks pretty good, chrome wise. I think you would have to say that chrome wears far better than paint.

I'd think your camera will look pretty good 100 years from now.
 
Rereading this thread made me realize I was neglecting my M2. It's loaded up and ready to go (with Summar) for the weekend.

Vince's run of pictures up there is just stunning.
 
i have seen "brassy" chrome M2's - but that usually meant that they were worn down everywhere else too. One that I had - had the metal below the advance worn to the thickness of paper. It would actually 'flex" when you advanced the film!!! The chrome is more resistant to wear - but it looks uglier when worn.
It would take a 10-15000 rolls to really get it down to bare brass though.
 
I've just been bitten by the M2 bug also this week after getting my hands on one, now I know why Tom has so many in his collection - I had to smuggle it into the house past the wife but I think the bright DHL van outside gave it away. :D

It just feels so right in the hands, can't explain it & my M8 just does not feel like it despite it being within a few mm the same size/shape almost.
 
anyone have any pics of a really well used chrome M2? I've searched google and flickr in vain to find a pic of a beat up brassed one... they all look so nice.
 
I'm putting in entry #130 (or thereabouts) in this thread. I'd call that a good deal of M2 love. :)

The one in my possession (chrome) has had relatively little wear. Which is a good thing, sinc it's going to get a workout once I get the blasted rewind knob thingy fixed properly!


- Barrett
 
Disaster_Area said:
anyone have any pics of a really well used chrome M2? I've searched google and flickr in vain to find a pic of a beat up brassed one... they all look so nice.
Click to expand...

I have to admit, I kind of idly rub mine with my thumbs while I'm walking sometimes...there's an engraving on the back (somebody else's name) and I would love to wear it off eventually. But I can't bear the thought of intentionally taking some sandpaper to it.

The chrome seems amazingly sturdy--more so than the black chrome on my M7, which is more visibly worn, even in just the year I've had it.
 
I notice I commented on this a year ago, just over. Since then I have taken a good few thousand frames with my M2, and it's need of a CLA big time (shutter blinds sticking, rewind knob is loose...) but then I have got great use from it.

The problem is I can't afford the CLA at the moment, it could cost me £250 or so if I need new shutter blinds. :(

Sometimes it's fine, other times you get this bright overexposed strip, not more than a mm across probably less, but it can appear right down the middle of the frame ruining a shot.

But I can be happy about it too, because since getting the M2, I have almost completed my first real documentary project (the Milton Keynes one), which I have had one exhibition of, one coming up, and 2 more with dates tbc. So it's been a good camera to me. I even sold my first photo last week, so you know. Baby steps.

But it sure ain't paying for the bills yet. Not by a long shot, maybe never, but it's fine. It just needs fixing up a bit.

Vicky
 
Lilserenity said:
I notice I commented on this a year ago, just over. Since then I have taken a good few thousand frames with my M2, and it's need of a CLA big time (shutter blinds sticking, rewind knob is loose...)
Click to expand...

Vicky, I bought on an M2 last month and it's a great camera. It is also 48 years old and cost as much as a new Bessa. Is the Bessa built as well? Probably not. (I have an R4M.) It's also not 48 years old. Is the M2 a dead cinch to be more reliable than the Bessa? Not at all, I think.
 
wgerrard said:
Vicky, I bought on an M2 last month and it's a great camera. It is also 48 years old and cost as much as a new Bessa. Is the Bessa built as well? Probably not. (I have an R4M.) It's also not 48 years old. Is the M2 a dead cinch to be more reliable than the Bessa? Not at all, I think.
Click to expand...

Hard to say, about reliability. I've seen inside a Bessa L, I'm afraid and would put little stock in the thing lasting as long as a 48 year old Leica.

What I have seen of the Bessa L:
-The base is not metal, but very thin plastic held on with tiny self threading screws. Very bad.
-The escapement has at least two plastic gears. Very bad.
-The internal metal parts I've seen so far are stamped tin.
-The top is plastic.
-All the knobs are plastic.
-The shutter is metal but really crappy.
-The advance lever is stamped thin metal covered with a thin sheath of plastic.
-The camera back is all plastic.
-I think wherever plastic could be used it was used.

-It ain't a Leica M
 
literiter said:
Hard to say, about reliability. I've seen inside a Bessa L, I'm afraid and would put little stock in the thing lasting as long as a 48 year old Leica.

What I have seen of the Bessa L:
-The base is not metal, but very thin plastic held on with tiny self threading screws. Very bad.
-The escapement has at least two plastic gears. Very bad.
-The internal metal parts I've seen so far are stamped tin.
-The top is plastic.
-All the knobs are plastic.
-The shutter is metal but really crappy.
-The advance lever is stamped thin metal covered with a thin sheath of plastic.
-The camera back is all plastic.
-I think wherever plastic could be used it was used.

-It ain't a Leica M
Click to expand...

A Bessa R4* is not a Bessa L. Your description of the L does not match my R4M.

Besides, being made of metal -- brass, zinc, or otherwise -- is no guarantor of reliability. Modern plastics are often lighter and stronger than metals. If you doubt this, I suggest you don't fly.
 
wgerrard said:
A Bessa R4* is not a Bessa L. Your description of the L does not match my R4M.
Click to expand...

I'm glad if this is the case. I'm not likely to find out unless someone else posts pics of inside the camera.

I also agree that many modern plastics are as good as or better than metal. Too bad these weren't used in my particular Bessa L.

Before I sound too bitter I must add that I also have a Voigtlander Heliar 15mm f4.5 LTM lens. This appears to be a well made lens and I really enjoy using it. I cannot assume the lens and the camera were made by the same company. I may consider getting a 50mm Voigtlander lens in the near future.
 
Last edited:
wgerrard said:
Vicky, I bought on an M2 last month and it's a great camera. It is also 48 years old and cost as much as a new Bessa. Is the Bessa built as well? Probably not. (I have an R4M.) It's also not 48 years old. Is the M2 a dead cinch to be more reliable than the Bessa? Not at all, I think.
Click to expand...

Well, given mine is 52 years old (quite an early one, lever rewind but no self timer) I think it's done pretty well. Not sure if it's had any attention since 1958, it must have at some point. But I scored it at a price that I could easily have paid almost double again so it was a good bargain. The problem is the people I bought it from went out of business before the warranty was up.

But no matter, because I love using the M2 so much, and because I know it can be fixed up, it seems rather irrational spending upto £250 on a camera to have to have it all brought up to scratch, but the degree to which I like my M2 is irrational; and money doesn't figure in it really. Never would I think of not fixing it up, it's a matter of time, I'd do anything to keep it going. And I know if it is done properly, it'll give it a real new lease of life.

Will it need another CLA at 70 years of age, probably, but in 20 years time I'm probably gonna need some attention here and there too :)

I have never used a Bessa extensively so couldn't comment.

But my point is just that £250 is a lot of money to spend on what is an old camera, but it's one I have a very irrational devoted relationship to, it's been good to me :)

Vicky
 
Lilserenity said:
But my point is just that £250 is a lot of money to spend on what is an old camera, but it's one I have a very irrational devoted relationship to, it's been good to me :)

Vicky
Click to expand...

"irrational devoted relationship"
-I bought my M2 in 1980. It was made in 1962. I recently paid $250.00 cdn. to have a proper CLA.
-The camera cost me $100.00 cdn. in 1980.
-The CLA $250.00 cdn
-I can sell the camera for about $700.00, plus I've had the pleasure of using it since 1980.
-I would net $350.00 if I were to sell it. (which won't happen)

I think you are being quite rational.
 
Folks, I'm not knocking the M2. I understand the irrational part of owning one, otherwise I would not have purchased mine. I just think that it is, in fact, also irrational to expect anything as old as any M2 to be perfect. As for the Bessa, I was just pointing out that for the price of an old M2 in user condition, you can also buy a brand new Bessa. My Bessa may not be hand built, but it also wasn't made in 1962 like my M2. I think that counts for something.
 
Ahh the M2 won't be perfect at the ages they are for sure. Like I say I can't comment on the Bessas because it wouldn't be fair to, I haven't used one enough, but the short time I used one for, very nice camera.

So I know you're not knocking the M2, and even if you were, I'd be fine with that too, not everyone must like what I like. The world would be a much duller if more peaceful place if we all were like that :)

As for being rational, maybe I am, I mean I'll get the CLA done and that'll last a long time, and I have no plans to ever sell my M2 so, I'd rather put money into it, than to something that in 10 years time will be obsolete and I may have trouble getting drivers working with the latest and greatest OS. Maybe that won't be a problem with USB now being around and standardised memory cards.

Regardless, to me, spending 80% of what I paid for my M2 on a CLA with shutter (you have to be so careful, I next to U, I dunno!) replacement seems like a good idea to me.

Just hoping that a bit of kickback from performing well at work comes through this week. It'll be the first time ever if I do.

Vicky
 
Lilserenity said:
... I'll get the CLA done and that'll last a long time, and I have no plans to ever sell my M2...
Click to expand...

Sounds rational to me. I'd certainly pay to have mine serviced, if and when it needs it.

It's funny how many people of us choose a camera based on comfort, feel, reputation, etc., and not on an analysis of its technical capabilities depicted as a long list of performance statistics. Folks here choose rangefinders, old or new, for varied reasons, which we all love to explain to each other. But, have you ever seen someone justify a purchase by posting a dpreview-style list of stats? No, because that's secondary.

The numbers are important for digital purchases, because digitals are in the position of personal computers in the eighties and early nineties, when a percentile of improvement would distinguish you in that immature market.

RF's, by contrast, are so simple and so much alike that we have the luxury of focusing on things like reliability, the number of framelines and whether or not they're visible to eyeglass wearers, what the thing is coated with, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom