thinking about an m4-2

[ghost]

basically because they're the same price as nice m2s, but they have the angled rewind crank. and it's black and has the less cluttered m4 framelines. would be great if i could upgrade to the .85x mp finder, replace the metal eyepiece with a rubber one, and repaint it. is this possible?

i also read a pretty bad review of the m4-2 and m4-p by stephen gandy. do they really feel cheap? what about them gives that impression? i've owned an m2 and handled many other leicas before, so i have some basis for comparison.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17140&page=2&pp=20&highlight=m4-2

 

[erikhaugsby]

The black chrome (that doesn't brass, but instead rubs) and the Zinc (zinc, right? or is it aluminum?) top plate tend to give feelings of less-than-solidness for some people, others believe nothing of the sort.

Also, the rewind crank is much more prone to breaking than the knob on your M2.

Finally, there isn't that nice little Leica engraving on the top plate, instead there is a pressed Leitz name brand. And they both have a possibility of having that ever-annoying (opinion here) red dot by the Lens Mount release button.

 

[Kim Coxon]

Another thought might be an M4. Gets round all the criticisms of the later versions apart from the fact it is likely to be chrome. Then again you could always get a black paint job from CRR or Shintaro.

Kim

 

[Mike Richards]

The M4-2 is a great camera usually found at a reasonable price. I have a new version MP, M7, 2-M6TTL, M4-2, M3, and M2. Among them, the M4-2 is the smoothest handling one with a wonderfully quiet and intuitive feel to the shutter release. And unlike the M3 and M2, it did not need an expensive CLA when I bought it. I rather suspect the ELCAN technicians and assemblers worked extra hard on the fit and finish so as to avoid unfavorable comparisons to the models assembled in Germany. Others consider the Canadian M4s to be inferior. I disagree completely based on my experience.

 

[VictorM.]

At one time, I owned an M2. Now I own an M4-2. From the viewpoint of a photographer, there's really not a big difference between them despite what some claim. I guess collectors could argue the finer points. The black M4-2 seems to attract less attention than the chrome M2. The only frameline difference is the addition of the 135mm frame on the M4-2-great if you buy Joe's Canon 135/3.5. More info: http://nemeng.com/leica/#032b and http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/mseries/choosem.html.

The only modification I've found necessary has been to cover the metal eyepiece with tape or liquid electrical tape. If you think you need a different mag finder, etc., you would be better off buying a camera with what you want (M6?) rather than paying for retrofits.

 

[Harry Lime]

The M4-2 is a crap shoot.

Some people have been shooting with the M4-2 for years, without a problem.

Mine had a full CLA and died within 6 months.

Another person I know had a similar experience. A full CLA/rebuild and the camera failed within a year.

On the other hand my other M cameras have eaten through hundreds or thousands of rolls of film under all sorts of conditions without a hitch .

Upgrading the viewfinder to a .85 is an expensive operation. You are looking at a solid $450 bill. You will also end up with the cluttered M6 framelines, which are also less accurate than the old style markings in the M2/M4/M5/M4-2 and early M4-P cameras.


I would recommend a M4-P, if you are looking for a M camera with modern features at an attractive price. If the cluttered viewfinder bothers you, send it in to a service technician and have him 'turn off' the markings you don't need. DAG or Sherry Krauter at Golden Touch can perform this operation

 

[kbg32]

I have had my M4-2 for 26 years. It has worked flawlessly. No problems whatsoever.