Vickko
Veteran
Yeah, the white film reminder was a joke when it was introduced.
You were supposed to use it with a Leitz-provided grease pencil.
Vick
You were supposed to use it with a Leitz-provided grease pencil.
Vick
Roger Hicks
Veteran
My first ever new Leica was an M4-P some 25 years ago. It's not bad, and I'm still using it, but it is/was the least smooth Leica I've ever used and the black chrome finish is/was bloody awful: a dealer friend suggested I return it under warranty, it wore so fast and so badly. The smoothest Leicas I've ever used have been M3s, but I've never kept one long: no 35mm frame rules them out for me. In fact, my M4-P was a trade for a black paint M3. Now I have a black paint MP and it's very close indeed to a traditional M2 in feel (I also have 2x M2 and an M8, all chrome). I like the MP so much I keep wondering about 'outing' both M2s and the M4P and putting the money towards another MP.
It's all a question of feel, features and function. For me the MP wins so easily on function (especially with the Leicavit) and features (everything except the rewind crank, and I once had to repair the crank on my M4P in Slovenia, so I don't mind a knob) that I can live with very slightly inferior feel next to an M3. I've had most screw Leicas (owned A-I-II-III-IIIa-IIIb-IIIc-IIIf-IIIg, tried/borrowed a few others including a fake IIId) and athough they feel lovely I'd go for an M for function and features every time.
Edit: oh, and the M4P finder patch flares out worse than the MP and MUCH worse than either M2.
Cheers,
Roger
It's all a question of feel, features and function. For me the MP wins so easily on function (especially with the Leicavit) and features (everything except the rewind crank, and I once had to repair the crank on my M4P in Slovenia, so I don't mind a knob) that I can live with very slightly inferior feel next to an M3. I've had most screw Leicas (owned A-I-II-III-IIIa-IIIb-IIIc-IIIf-IIIg, tried/borrowed a few others including a fake IIId) and athough they feel lovely I'd go for an M for function and features every time.
Edit: oh, and the M4P finder patch flares out worse than the MP and MUCH worse than either M2.
Cheers,
Roger
Last edited:
Michiel Fokkema
Michiel Fokkema
Hi,
last weekend I shot with a M4-P and a M2 side by side. Both are great camera's. Yes there are differences but both are great camera's and come very close in handling. M4-P has the benefit of more frame lines and the M2 has the benefit of a less cluttered vf. For the rest they are the same to me.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
last weekend I shot with a M4-P and a M2 side by side. Both are great camera's. Yes there are differences but both are great camera's and come very close in handling. M4-P has the benefit of more frame lines and the M2 has the benefit of a less cluttered vf. For the rest they are the same to me.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
Last edited:
JNewell
Leica M Recidivist
Do you notice a difference between the MP and the M2? I would have thought the MP, with its AR-coated surfaces, would be at least equivalent if not brighter and no more flare-prone???
maddoc
... likes film again.
Interesting ! I now have both, M4-P (recessed windows, brass top plate) and MP (0.72x) and the VF of the MP flares more compared with my M4-P. Only the M3s I used, were quite free of VF flare. The M6 was worst of all. Which M4-P version do you have ?Roger Hicks said:
Dogman
Veteran
Seems appropriate that my first post (I've actually tried before but wasn't recognized) should be about my first rangefinder camera.
An M4-P was my first Leica and the only new Leica I've ever owned. I bought it around 1984, about the same time that the M6 was just being released. Unfortunately I had to sell it some time later to get my hands on some much-needed cash. I didn't really utilize the M4-P to its fullest potential but I have fond memories of that camera. Memories that led to my later purchase of the two M6's I still have and use. One of my M6 bodies lost the meter several years ago. I've never bothered to get it repaired--it's now pretty much an M4-P.
An M4-P was my first Leica and the only new Leica I've ever owned. I bought it around 1984, about the same time that the M6 was just being released. Unfortunately I had to sell it some time later to get my hands on some much-needed cash. I didn't really utilize the M4-P to its fullest potential but I have fond memories of that camera. Memories that led to my later purchase of the two M6's I still have and use. One of my M6 bodies lost the meter several years ago. I've never bothered to get it repaired--it's now pretty much an M4-P.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dunno. Bought it new about 25 years ago. My first ever new Leica and my first new Leica until the MP a couple of years back. Zinc from the look of the rubbed-through stuff, but maybe there's silver chrome under the black chrome. Totally agree that M3s are best, but then, they are best for most things except 35mm lenses.maddoc said:
And for JNewell, the M2s do seem better, but only fractionally, and (unlike the M4P and M2) I've not tried MP and M2 side by side under really demanding lighting.
Cheers,
Roger
Last edited:
TJV
Well-known
One thing I have noticed between my M6, M7 and M4-P is that the viewfinder lines in the M4-P are a lot brighter. As for the flare, my M6 has always been bad for it and my M7 hasn't had the flare fix so the M4-P wins so far. My old M3 was the best in this regard as a lot of you have said.
The M4-P, although definatly not as smooth as my newish M7 or old M3, seems a lot tighter and precise. Could just be in my head.
I haven't run a roll through it yet, for some reason I'm addicted to my Mamiya 7ii. I'm mid project using MF so the Leica's are mostly hanging over my shoulder at the moment.
The M4-P, although definatly not as smooth as my newish M7 or old M3, seems a lot tighter and precise. Could just be in my head.
I haven't run a roll through it yet, for some reason I'm addicted to my Mamiya 7ii. I'm mid project using MF so the Leica's are mostly hanging over my shoulder at the moment.
JNewell
Leica M Recidivist
This is funny...my M4-P, which I really liked, was the worst-flaring M I've owned (M3, M4 x2, M5, M4-P, M6 x4). There must be some kind of sample variation issue.
literiter
Well-known
I've been reading these posts about the flare issue with the M finders and checked my cameras. Sure enough, with my M4-P... flare. The same, but not as bad, with my M2. I wouldn't have ever noticed this without someone mentioning it. I've had this stuff for so long I've grown used to it I suppose.
My M4-P has seen a lot more action than my coveted M2. It has been exposed over the years to some really bad weather and perhaps condensation has messed up the insides of the finder. If this is the case then how about the lenses? This will cost some time and money...Damn it!
Ignorance is more blissful.
My M4-P has seen a lot more action than my coveted M2. It has been exposed over the years to some really bad weather and perhaps condensation has messed up the insides of the finder. If this is the case then how about the lenses? This will cost some time and money...Damn it!
Ignorance is more blissful.
maddoc
... likes film again.
I can really recommend sending your M4-P to service ... My camera was a little rough and the slow times sounded arkward until I received it back from Youxin Ye who ClA'ed it. Now ... not thaaat smooth as my MP but close.literiter said:
If some dirt / grease has condensed on the glass surfaces of the VF flare will get worse I guess ...
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
I have owned two M4-P with recessed windows. I used them for years before I could pony up for the M6 and think they are excellent cameras. Once I passed up a mint M4-P boxed selling for $695 just because (dumb). But the truth is I work better with metering data in the VF.
I think they are sleepers in Leicadom as is the 28mm/2.8 ASPH. What a combination.
I think they are sleepers in Leicadom as is the 28mm/2.8 ASPH. What a combination.
maddoc
... likes film again.
literiter
Well-known
Over time and use the film wind on the M4-P has become almost as smooth as my M2. The M2 is pretty smooth.
I wish Leitz had designed a proper film indicator for the back of their cameras, perhaps like that nice box top holder Nikon put on the back of my F2 and F3.
I've cleaned the finders on both cameras and reduced the flare. Very good now.
I wish Leitz had designed a proper film indicator for the back of their cameras, perhaps like that nice box top holder Nikon put on the back of my F2 and F3.
I've cleaned the finders on both cameras and reduced the flare. Very good now.
ddcc
Newbie
Joe, are you saying that an M2 and M4-P have same level of 'build-quality' then? I have multiple M2/M3/M4 and I don't even want an M4-P, it is indeed a cheapen version anyone familiar with Leica knows it. Or you want to argue that M4-P is better built than M2/3/4?
I drive a BMW and used to drive a Toyota, latter was very reliable but beamer is better built i think
ddcc
Newbie
craftsmanship has nothing with M3's higher mag VF, you are totalling missing the point. also i wonder why you'd say 'in practice it doesn't mean a thing' while talking 'craftsmanship'. it means the whole lot to the vast majority of Leica buyers, as nobody is willing to pay good price for a mint M4-P but mint M2/3/4 are much more desirable. 'In practice' if you meant it in terms of function and reliability, think Cosina, does it still mean nothing? I haven't seen a Cosina breaking down yet but what do people prefer?
nothing strange about craftsmanship, M2/3/4 have great one while M4-P is pretty shytty in comparison, that's all.
literiter
Well-known
I have a M2 and a M4-P. I have had them both apart, and worked on both. The innards are pretty much identical. The M4-P has steel gears to accommodate a motor drive wheras the M2 has brass gears. This makes the M4-P less smooth. (This must be very common knowledge.)
I will say that the mechanical tolerances on the M4-P are higher than the M2. When it comes to "craftsmanship" I find both my cameras to have identical craftsmanship. The fact that the M4-P is so poorly valued when compared to the earlier Ms is based on some silly emotional bias developed over time and little else.
As for the final finish, general appearance, and a certain preciousness... well its my M2.
ferider
Veteran
There are two types of M4-Ps, very differently built.
I find mine (early) similar in usage to my M2. The M3 is a different story, of course
If you want the classic 35/50mm framelines, and 28/75, there is no other choice. Period.
Roland.
I find mine (early) similar in usage to my M2. The M3 is a different story, of course
If you want the classic 35/50mm framelines, and 28/75, there is no other choice. Period.
Roland.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
I have used an M4 for a few years and just got an M4-P. As far as I can tell from using both it is a toss up for which on to use. The M4 is a little smoother having had a recent CLA where the M4-P has not. I have not noticed much difference with VF flare. The external fit and finish of both a similar. No I don't like the red dot on the M4-P but that has nothing to do with how it functions. As a tool I think it is under valued compared to previous Ms. Mine has the recessed windows.
Bob
Bob
Joop van Heijgen
Established
Joe, are you saying that an M2 and M4-P have same level of 'build-quality' then? I have multiple M2/M3/M4 and I don't even want an M4-P, it is indeed a cheapen version anyone familiar with Leica knows it. Or you want to argue that M4-P is better built than M2/3/4?
I drive a BMW and used to drive a Toyota, latter was very reliable but beamer is better built i think
"Based on a couple decades' steady use of an M2 and an M4-P, I have found them equally good shooters in terms of reliability."
I have a M4 and a M4-P for many years, and I must say I agree with it!
There are little differences between the two cameras but in practical usage there are no differences.