M2 in M3 chassis

[gilpen123]

I bought an M2 here a few months back and sent it to YY for CLA. I was surprised to know that the M2 was a a modified DS M3 chassis. It's good as a consolation that the winding head was from an M2. This is the 1st time I encountered such modification and I would say the seller was not honest about the description if he has knowledge of it. Anyone knows about this type of modification? Thanks.

 

[kshapero]

New one on me.

 

[Rob-F]

Similar things have been done from time to time. I'm not quite clear what you have, from the description, though. Does it look like an M2, with manual resetting counter, no ring guard around the lens release catch, fresnel illuminator window, no raised frames around the front windows? Does it have M2 framelines and .72 magnification? Or like an M3, with raised window frames, 50/90/135 framelines, etc?

I'd be pretty upset if this happened to me.

What's the serial number?

 

[Vincent.G]

Did you contact the seller about this? What was his reply?

 

[gilpen123]

I didn't contact the seller yet. The M2 is still on the way here from YY. Everything on the outside including frame line mask looks like an M2 to me. Only when opened did YY found out about the modification. This is the actual unit before I sent to YY>

 

[gilpen123]

My previous M3

 

[Vincent.G]

So you mean the body shell excluding the top plate is a M3? The internal gears such as shutter curtain drums are M2 or M3?

Perhaps Tom A can shed some light on what is possible to modify.

 

[gilpen123]

Maybe not really sure what was M3 inside. This actually devalues the M2 as it is no longer an original M2.

 

[gilpen123]

This was an excerpt from the email I got

" It is uncommon for a M2 with modified M3
> chassis. The chassis serial number is 87xxxx.
> From your M2 serial number, the original chassis does not
> have serial number. DS M3 chassis is very different
> from M2 and late M3 chassis. This devalues your
> camera. Also DS M3 chassis is not as reliable as SS M3
> or M2, but it is ok since the camera still has M2 winding
> head, which is a lot more reliable than DS M3 winding head.
> Best regards,"

 

[sanmich]

I don't really understand the problem:
It seems to me that all the external parts are M2. I guess the finder is too, and you say that the winding part is M2 too (funny thing to say).
what exactly remains?
the chassis? the metal structure holding everything together?
I wouldn't care If I were in your shoes...
What if you discovered that a small part, a curtain, ring, slow speed mech, whatever has been replaced during a former repair and is not the original?
Seems ok to me as long as you didn't buy a collector item, and payed for such.
If the camera is working good, and it looks good, I would enjoy it and forget about former repairs...

[edit] I see the email. I would ask what is an unreliable chassis. it's not a moving part, so maybe the problems, if there were problems were about tolerances?
I would ask Don or Sherry too about this...

 

[gilpen123]

I supposedly bought an M2 not an M2 in an M3 chassis and that is a problem to me. Yes I will use it definitely that's why I had it CLAd.

 

[Never Satisfied]

I had a Frankenstein / Leica M2 that was a combination of M3 and M2, budda ear strap lugs, M2 finder and SS all made from NOS parts by the previous owner.

I enjoyed it because I knew it was the only one, totally unique.

Enjoy it for what it is, a unique Leica.

Cheers Andrew.

 

[Fraser]

How would the seller ever know unless he took it to bits and was a Leica expert, as for lowering the value M2s are about the cheapest Leica you can buy if anything it makes the camera more interesting and in my mind more valuable!

 

[gilpen123]

I agree that seller may not even know unless he/she was the one who have it modified. Nevertheless, yeah the uniqueness may actually make it more interesting. I don't have any intention to sell it, after owning many Ms, I now have this (M2/3) a IIIf and a Nikon 28 ti as my only film camera. I just wonder what drove the modification.

 

[paradoxbox]

i wouldn't be angry about it. it's an interesting camera.

if you're unhappy with having it i think you could probably sell it for at least the price you paid for it or more simply by including the story of its strange but interesting modifications.

 

[Ronald_H]

Just out of curiosity, if it is based on an M3 DS, do you in fact have to do two strokes to advance the film and cock the shutter? Or does the fact that it has an M2 'winding head' (I cherish my ignorance on the subject) mean that a single stroke would be sufficient? Makes me wonder what's inside my old M2.

 

[raid]

If you paid a standard market price for your M2, I would just use the camera. DS or SS work for many years without any problems. There are "reports" from Leica repairmen who claim that the best made M ever was the DS.

Hope that they are right.

 

[gilpen123]

Yes I bought it at the current market price about $800 so no real issue on that. I'm going to use it as this is my only M film cam left. I also sent my 40 cron for CLA and filing of cam to come up with 35 mm. This is my ideal set-up 1 lens 1 cam. Now I will have an M2/3 and 35/40 Cron.