Leica M4-2

Discussion 3 posts |  Only members can post. Join?

About Leica M4-2

A LITTLE HISTORY
Leica found themselves in deep financial trouble in the mid 1970s due to the M5 being a dud, the SL2 too expensive and general rangefinder sales in steep decline. So after making one final batch of M4's, they decided curtail all M production for a while. This caused an unexpected furor amongst Leicaphiles, so much so that after a few months Leica pressed the M4-2 into production to silence critics and meet the sudden resurgence in demand. Due to the company's financial troubles however, cost savings had to be made. This was done by redesigning the body mechanism and manufacturing process, and by moving the entire production run to the Midland plant in Canada.

So far so good. Moving to Midland wasn't that big a deal as Leica was moving a lot of their production there anyway: the 50mm M Summicrons, the 90mm M tele-elmarits and indeed even the 900 much-sought-after black-paint M4s were all made there in 1974. So clearly our Canadian friends knew what they were doing. Right?…

Once they ironed out the production bugs however, subsequent runs of the M4-2 became just as tough and reliable as later Leica Ms.

Consider this… The M4-2's interior shutter mechanism is markedly similar to that of the current M6: a steel gear and shutter layout which works well and reliably after 20 years of hard use. Of course the M4-2's RF optics were modified and cheapened from that of the M4, but as all the latter Ms until the MP inherited this cheaper scheme, we can hardly complain about it. Ditto the rewind knob simplification and self-timer removal - decisions retained in the M line for over twenty years, not dumb mistakes dropped ASAP (c.f. the Leica M5's and CL's shutter speed dial or lightmeter-on-a-swinging-stick).

Furthermore the M4-2 has also inherited some good things from the M4, like the uncluttered RF frameset (only 35mm, 50mm, 90mm & 135mm), the use of top and bottom brass body shells (later Ms until the M7 use a less malleable & cheaper to manufacture zinc alloy) and even the much-hated-at-the-time plastic tipped film advance lever. Then there is the built-in, off-the-shelf motordrive support due to the use of steel gears - the first M Leica to do so.

It thus appears that the entire M4-2 production run has become unfairly stigmatised by a poor reputation earned by the first few hundred cameras. Provided you steer well clear of these (serial #s: 1 468 001 - 1482 000), it makes little sense to dismiss the entire production run. Granted it is not as exquisitely crafted as an M4 (what is?), but it is still clearly part of the evolutionary line which lives today as the M7 & MP.

The M3s & M4s are coveted because they were made during Leica's golden days in the 50's and 60's in Wetzlar. M5s, although despised when released, have because of their rarity become a must-have object f or fanatical collectors. M6s had high resale prices because they were for a long time the current production model.

M4-2's alas are in the doldrums and despite only 16 000 of them being made, remain not collectors items - unlike M4's ( 60 000 ) M5's ( 33 000 ) and SL2's ( 22 700 ). Surely it is only a matter of time?…

"http://leica.nemeng.com/016b.shtml"