m4-2 really??

[jwinst]

So, the M4-2, I know the jist of its history. Leicas saving grace as a lower quality M body, cheaper production cost, The R line didnt soar as high as they wished etc. etc.

Is it really so much lower quality than the standard M??

Compared to the legend of the M3, or the modern M6???

I know its arbitrary, but I like a black body leading me away from any of the 3's. I dont have the $$$ to throw down on a 6(unless someone is willing to toss me one for under 1000, wink wink), so its basically between the various 4's for me likely with the CV 40/1.4. and I like non-metered cameras. Shooting is so much more intuitive I think.

​

 

[sebastel]

a quite used M4-2 was my entry into the M-world, and it served me very well until i gave it away for a nikon AF lens ... (no comments necessary on this!)

to me it seemed a bit cheaper - but not that much as the difference in the prices is.
the only backdraft i see is that the black chrome does not wear beautifully. but for a user camera, no reason to hesitate.

i say, better an M4-2 than no leica.
🙂
sebastian

 

[jlw]

So, the M4-2, I know the gist of its history. Leicas saving grace as a lower quality M body, cheaper production cost, The R line didnt soar as high as they wished etc. etc.

Is it really so much lower quality than the standard M??

Compared to the legend of the M3, or the modern M6???​

It isn't of lower quality compared to later models. At the time, some people said it had been "cheapened" compared to the M2/M3/M4. Some of this "cheapening" was trivial stuff such as a different material used in the frame-counter pointer (Later models have had similiar simplifications) and some of it was substitution of stronger gears in the winding train to stand up to the load imposed by the electric winder that was introduced at the same time; the stronger gears were said to give the camera somewhat less smooth "feel" when winding.

Of course it was made in a former-Allied country rather than a former-Axis country, and some people believe that always connotes lower-quality workmanship. But I never noticed anything wrong with the construction or finish of the one I owned. And whenever I'd encounter some Leica-idolator enthusing about how "there's nothing like that German craftsmanship, is there?" I always enjoyed responding, "Gee, I wouldn't know about that" and pointing to the MADE IN CANADA engraving...​

 

[kbg32]

I've had my M4-2 for 26 years. It's been everywhere with me without nary a problem. I don't find it to be a "cheapened" M at all.

 

[VictorM.]

I've had an M2 and now I have an M4-2. There's really not much difference except the M2 was a little quieter and smoother operating. I use a 40/2 Summicron-C on my M4-2 most of the time. The small difference between frameline coverage and what gets on the film is rarely noticeable. The only problem I've had came when I slammed the body into an icy sidewalk last winter; the rangefinder alignment was thrown off. I had to pay to have it adjusted because it needs that special tool. (Does anyone know what that tool looks like?)
More info (but may not be any more authoritative than what you'll find here):
http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/mseries/choosem.html
http://nemeng.com/leica/016b.shtml

 

[jwinst]

i say, better an M4-2 than no leica.
🙂
sebastian

Amen, Thats about how I see it now

 

[x-ray]

I owned M2's, 3's and 4's for may years and purchased a new M4-2 when it came out. Also owned a new M4-P and currently have MP's and a M6. I shot thousands of rolls in the M4-2, M4P and M6 and never had the first problem. In well over 10,000 rolls and 4 decades of shooting M's the only problem has been two RF calibrations, 1 goggles calibration on a 135 elmarit and a broken self timer spring on a 1955 M3. Not bad! If I haven't worn them out I don't think they can be.


http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=5045

 

[Mike Richards]

My M4-2 is the smoothest operating M that I have, and that includes M2, M3, M6TTL, and new MP. The price was reasonable when I got it about a year ago, and it did not need a CLA (unlike the M2 and M3). I suspect that Leica and ELCAN took extra pains with their Canadian assembly to avoid appearing like a second rate factory. Don't believe there's a whit of quality difference between the Canadian Ms and German ones. Since some people beleive the Canadian ones are inferior, you can often buy an M4-2 at lower relative prices than the German models.