Why choose the M2 over the M4?

The solitary framelines and the film rewind on the M2. Plus I also use an MP3 which is essentially an M2 with a meter.
 
I agree with you that some of the frame lines are surplus to requirements, would love to get rid of the 75mm one. Is there away to do this? BTW whats an MP3?
Regards
paul
 
Last edited:
I have an M2, M3, two M4's, and an M6, I prefer the M4. I like the M4's film counter, rewind crank, and lack of a separate film spool. Were both cameras available in the same quantities, and at the same price, most people would likely prefer the M4. But it pays to shop around, I paid less for my M4's than I paid for my M3 or M2.
 
Asim said:
Simple question... what is the advantage of the M2 over the M4? The M4 has all the features of the M2 except for the rewind lever. The M4 even has a better film inserting system. It's even a newer body.
Click to expand...

ummmmmm.... personal preference. Once you understand the various features of each, you choose based on what matters most to you. :D
 
Both cameras are excellent, of course, so I agree that personal preference acts the subjective judge. The M2 loads fine, but I find the M4 film loading superb (I put a little bend at the end of the leader). As for the film rewind, my preference is for the M2—I think the M4 rewind is underpowered, and I have had to replace the rewind knob on my M4 when the knurled handle fell off (M5 has superb rewind that will not backspin).
 
Ill stick with my M4P and M7. Use wides (21,28mm) on the M4P and 35,90 and 135mm on the M7. Long lenses makes the lightmeter more or less a spot meter.
 
Well, the M4 doesn't really do anything that you can't do with an M2, unless you own (and use) a 135mm lens, in which case you can use the M4's 135mm frameline. I don't especially like the plastic swivel tip on the M4 winding lever (in fact I replaced the one on my M6 with an M2/MP style lever). And I like the M2/MP style rewind knob. This is all personal preference, it doesn't mean that one is right and the other wrong.

I have had my M2 for over 50 years. I'm quite comfortable with M2/M3 type film loading. I can do it just as fast as on my M6s and MP.

The manual-reset film counter? No problem. The counter may be manual, but resetting it is completely automatic, after you start using an M2. You just do it. Like winding a manual-winding mechanical watch in the morning.

So: The M4 is a nice camera. But it doesn't actually do anything I can't do with my M2.
 
Benjamin Marks said:
I think the answer is that not everyone would. But for those that would, the two previous posters have identified the answer. Arguments for the M4 are a camera that is 20 years "newer," has less wear on all mechanical and optical components, is compatible with all modern accessories (e.g. Rapidwinder, motor drive) without modification, has a wider viewfinder (if you like 28's 24's etc.). I had an M4-P that I liked very much, but I sold it to get the light meter in my M6. Kept my M3s though. And later, much later, bought an M2. I think all these cameras feel great in the hand and respond in the way you expect and M camera to.
Click to expand...

The Leicavit-MP works with the M2, along with the M1 and MD
Tom A. Still has the rapidwinder-ixmoo up, this is also for the M2

I think the classic look and feel gives a certain allure!
 
The M2 is available without a self-timer, which makes for a cleaner, more minimal front. I prefer this quite a bit. Plus, those 135 framelines would annoy me (actually, any two-in-one frameline setting does), and I don't like the angled rewind crank at all.

That said, all Ms are great.
 
...not shure, but I think You cannot use a motor drive neither on M2 nor on M4.....the first use the Barnack spool, the second the "tulip" spool but there is no link for the motor-drive inside it...the first M camera for motor-drive use is the M4-2.
Due to this T.Abramsson's Rapid-Winder is avaiable in 2 versione, one for the M2/M3, one for the M4-2 (and so on...), but for the M4 you must modified the camera.....
I've got the M2 and the MDa, that use the same winding (& loading) system of the M4, and I can't see any device for the motor-drive inside.
The "Barnack" spool I think is better than the "tulip" spool.....the second, at least once, loose the film tip....it never appened with the "Barnack" type spool, even on my Screw-Mount cameras....
 
Factory versions of the M4 were made to take a motor drive. They were labelled M4-M and M4-MOT. These were part of the original M4 production run, not the M4-2 restart, and have all the usual M4 goodness (like the ST). Info gleaned from Lager.
 
Touché!


elmar50.jpg

​
 
The M2 is far prettier, especially the early button-rewind version(s). ;)

I find the removable spool makes it easier to load, but that's nothing that can't be cured by a little practice.
 
M4's are nice - but the rewind gets easily bashed up - and as I rarely use a 135 - those frames bug me when using it.
M2 is simplicity - 3 frames and easy loading (I can usually load a M2 faster than a M4). The film counter does not jam at frame 38/39.
As for motor winder - There was a series of M2's with connections to the Leica N.Y motor and case hardened steel gears. A couple of 100 were designated M2M - but another couple of 100 were just designated M2 (usually in the 1.1xx xxx range). The motor was interesting - I had one for some years and it always quit at about frame 24/25.
I still have a body - no motor. Feels pretty bullet proof - but rough advance - those steel gears need a lot of film going through it to smooth out.
The M4M and M4M would take Leicavit MP's and the M2 Rapidwinder with some adjustment. My last M4M is now in Hong Kong and it even has the correct motor on it - and it works well.
Well. I have considerably more M2's than M4 derivatives (M4P/M4-2).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom