Love my M2 !!!

3758372531_94e6d9b73e_b.jpg
 
The old black paint M2' and M3's had a tendency to "bubble" the paint. Acid from the hands of the user and the reaction between the paint and the brass would have the paint go almost like a crackle finish very fast.
When Leica started painting the M's black, they went away from the original laquer finish to a more "modern" paint. They also used a matte black undercoat (shrinks less when drying). We should also remember that these were a $15-25 premium over the chrome when new. There were mainly made at the request of newsphotographers as they were bit more discreet.
In the late 50's and early 60's Leica would convert your chrome body to black for roughly $50. You just gave the camera to an authorized dealer and if big enough, they had the parts and the engraving machine for making a black one (the chrome tops were supposedly destroyed so that there would not be two cameras with the same #).
The biggest problem with the original black paint M's - if you intend to use them - is the soft,brass straplugs. They would wear out quickly and result in dropped cameras. Over the years I had mine replaced with stainless lugs instead.
 
Tom A said:
The biggest problem with the original black paint M's - if you intend to use them - is the soft,brass straplugs. They would wear out quickly and result in dropped cameras. Over the years I had mine replaced with stainless lugs instead.
Click to expand...

Mine has tiny stainless steel inserts in the straplugs. A competent repairman can install such inserts.

Erik.
 
The fall/winter rains have started here in the Northwest. This, coupled with the fact that I just loaded 140 IXMOO cassettes of Kodak XX has set me going on a project of cycling through all my M2's. The excuse being that this way I can check shutter speeds, rangefinder's etc! The lenses will be Nokton 40f1.4's - MC and SC. Ok, there will be other lenses in the projects - but these two will be the "main" glass used.
I find that when the weather get 'dreary" a project like this keeps the "trigger" finger going - even though the results are a bit "blah" sometimes.
I might even start a separate "set" on Flickr for this - at least if there are some interesting shots coming off the XX.
The M2 is in many ways perfect for the 35's - but the 40f1.4 works extremely well on it with the "claw" filed down to give me 35 frame-lines. With glasses the 0.72 frame can be a bit tight and the 40 gives me just the right coverage.
 
Eric, the 50f3.5 Elmar-M is a little gem. I find it sharper than the f2.8 I in most cases. Just took a walk and shot 2 rolls of XX - finishing one roll in a M2 with an old 90f2 Summicron from 1964 and another one with a 40f1.4 SC. If the weather stays decent - a couple of more XX's with both 40's and another developing run.
 
Tom A said:
I just loaded 140 IXMOO cassettes of Kodak XX
Click to expand...

You have 140 IXMOOs?!? No wonder they cost 20 bucks apiece out here in the real world!

XX is absolutely the s%#t--devs nice, scans nice, plenty of latitude, beautiful grain and tonality...it's the only film my M2 has seen in months.
 
Michael,

I think it is better than the screw mount red scale Elmar 50mm f/3.5. It must be recomputed, because it gives no unsharp corners, as all the screw-mount Elmar 50mm's do. But maybe it is only better because of the better build quality.
It is a great little lens, very underrated.

Erik.
 
mabelsound said:
You have 140 IXMOOs?!? No wonder they cost 20 bucks apiece out here in the real world!
Click to expand...

Actually I have 200+ IXMOOS - I just got bored loading them and I have to thaw out another XX 400ft can. I have accumulated these over the years as I have always been using them and now and then i still find them in Camera stores junkbins and at Swapmeets. They are getting a bit tricky to find these days and the prices have gone up - unfortunately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom