Love my M2 !!!

[mynikonf2]

Tom,
Thanks for pointing me towards this camera, it has turned out to be one of my all time favorites! For many years I have been a loyal Nikon F & F2 user & wondered why so many photogs bought those expensive German cameras? The idea of not looking through the lens to compose your image seemed dated at best. Even the direction you focus the lens is backwards! Well time & I dare say "older age" mellowed my position to where I became willing to try something different. That's when I trusted your experience & advice and bought a M2. At first I wasn't sure, but the feel of this solid little box was good. So, I kept working with it and started to experience some comfort, followed by confidence. Damn! I was hooked! Now I have ventured into the screw mount Leicas as well. I can finally agree with you, there's alot to be said for the M2 and there's alot I do not, as yet, have the words to say about the M2!!

[Lilserenity]

The M2 is sure a fine camera.
In fact too fine, my EOS 3 hasn't had much use since I got mine.
I didn't expect it to be so good!

[FrankS]

The M2 is just right.

[Tom A]

There is something so elementary about the M2. No fiddly controls, no diodes flashing - pure picture taking machine.
I think it frees us up to take more and hopefully better pictures. There is less of a tendency to "load" on stuff with them. In fact I find that I try to pare it down to minimalist status. A couple of them, maybe one extra lens from the 35/50 (usually a 21 or 25) - the whole package can be easily carried for a days walking.
Welcome to the M2 crowd - just look around for your second one so you dont have to change lenses - but don't blame me when you look in the camera cabinet and there are 14 of them there!!!!!!

[Ronald_H]

Originally Posted by Tom A

Welcome to the M2 crowd - just look around for your second one so you dont have to change lenses - but don't blame me when you look in the camera cabinet and there are 14 of them there!!!!!!

Tom, just don't say that puhleeze I change lenses on my M2 all the time. HOWEVER, soon I will get my FED-5 and Zorki 4K back, freshly CLA'd in Mother Russia. With the DR 'cron on the M2 and a VC 35 on the Zorki plus maybe the VC 25 on the FED... that would be sweeeeeet. I'll only need an additional finder for 35mm.

Granted, an additional M2 is sweeter still, but it's getting harder and harder to shoot with everything I own.

Anyway, the M2 is a joy. It's photgraphy stripped to its essentials and it is built to last forever.

But enough talking, I like to show I make pictures too:

[foggie]

i love my M2 too. No other camera (that I've felt) is quite like it. It's got the most smooth mechanical feel to it. It's a perfect picture taking machine

[helenhill]

CONGRATS!!
I'll have to Agree.....
here is my 1962 m2 with 'New Skin'

Best to You- helen

[Ronald M]

One great camera.

BTW, the lens does not focus backwards. Nikon lenses do. Pentax, canon, Leica are all correct.

[maddoc]

Originally Posted by Ronald M

BTW, the lens does not focus backwards. Nikon lenses do. Pentax, canon, Leica are all correct.

... !

I bought my M2 last year's December and didn't expect to much ... (having used 3 different M3s and two M4s before) but as Tom said, with the M2 they got it right.

Different from the M4 (and later models except the M5), film-loading is safer and more straight forward, different from the M3, 35mm lenses can be used, and different from both, genuine M3 and M4, a Rapidwinder can be installed. Additionally, the M2 VF only shows one frame line and the depth-of-field markings are quite useful sometimes.

So ...the M2 became my favorite of the "classic" M Leica cameras.

[wjlapier]

Great! That's all I need to see/hear. Just when I thought I was in Leica nirvana wiht my M3, the M2 looms.



Congrats on the Leica M. Since I've had my M3 ( maybe three weeks ) I can't stop picking it up, feeling it's heft, and wonder why I took so long to get one. Truthfully, I think a M2 is in my future--just have ot find the right one!

[mynikonf2]

Originally Posted by Ronald M

One great camera.

BTW, the lens does not focus backwards. Nikon lenses do. Pentax, canon, Leica are all correct.

I never realized that so many camera manufacturers could be wrong!
Really, I wonder why Nikon choose to buck the trend?

Tom, about that second M2, you wouldn't have one to spare? How did you ever end up with 14? I guess the same way I ended up with six Nikon F's.

[naruto]

I have a M2, and now ordered a M6 TTL. But, I don't have the heart to give up the M2.

[Tom A]

I never get rid of M2's! I have given a couple away as presents to friends (and quickly replaced them!). As for having 14 - I insist that they are for testing M2 Rapidwinders!
Six Nikon F's - interesting, that is my "cache" too! Two have 12 and 15 mm Voigtlander lenses on them. One has a big, heavy sportsfinder on it and the 55f3.5 on it for macro work. #4 is dedicated to the 105f2.5. #5 and 6 are used for 24/2.8 and 200f4 Micro! None of them are pretty - but a non beaten up F is almost an oxymoron. It is still one of the greatest of camera design. Modular, rugged and the sound of that mirror coming up and the shutter "bang" is a joy to listen too. They can also be used to beat the s**t out of a mugger - and then take pictures of him bleeding on the sidewalk!

[FrankHarries]

Originally Posted by Tom A

I never get rid of M2's! I have given a couple away as presents to friends (and quickly replaced them!). As for having 14 - I insist that they are for testing M2 Rapidwinders!
Six Nikon F's - interesting, that is my "cache" too! Two have 12 and 15 mm Voigtlander lenses on them. One has a big, heavy sportsfinder on it and the 55f3.5 on it for macro work. #4 is dedicated to the 105f2.5. #5 and 6 are used for 24/2.8 and 200f4 Micro! None of them are pretty - but a non beaten up F is almost an oxymoron. It is still one of the greatest of camera design. Modular, rugged and the sound of that mirror coming up and the shutter "bang" is a joy to listen too. They can also be used to beat the s**t out of a mugger - and then take pictures of him bleeding on the sidewalk!

please - let me be your friend!!!

[furcafe]

That's because Nippon Kogaku, back when they only made rangefinders in the years after WWII, adopted a mount that was a close variation (including the focus direction) of the Zeiss Ikon Contax, Leica's archrival from the 1930s-1960s. Because of Nikon's decision to maintain backwards compatibility, the "backwards" focus direction was carried on through the F series down to the present day. Kind of ironic, since: (1) Zeiss Ikon stopped making the Contax in the early 1960s & replaced it w/the ill-fated Contarex SLR system that used the "Leica" focus direction; & (2) Zeiss Ikon went out of business entirely in the early 1970s.

Reminds me of the factoid, possibly apocryphal, that the width of the standard railroad gauge is pretty much the same as the width of roads going all the way back to the days of the ancient Persian empires due to network & legacy effects based on the size of horse & oxen-drawn wagons.

Originally Posted by mynikonf2

I never realized that so many camera manufacturers could be wrong!
Really, I wonder why Nikon choose to buck the trend?

[Tom A]

The M2 on Ebay doesn't look too bad for a 50+ year old user. Unless most of the marks and dent were "applied" lately - it has most likely worked as stuff accumulated.
My only concern is that is has been used as a copystand camera and has done several 100 000 frames at slow speeds. The "tape residue" by the rear occular is typical for copy camera, either a designation # or more specific info on speed or film choice. The dent above the viewfinder is not significant - if it has been checked out and used after the hit. The vulcanite covering is no big deal. It can be recovered or simply covered up with black gaffers tape. The dent is also common with copy cameras - hamfisted operators take the camera off the stand and drop it!
If the camera goes cheap, a couple of $100 - it would be a worthwhile buy. Another couple of $100 for a CLA/curtain replacement and if the rangefinder is OK - you have a great user that you dont have to baby at all!
I have had worse looking ones and still have a couple of "ratty" looking ones. Mechanically they are fine - "beauty is only superficial" and it is the insides that count - even on M2's. It seems to have all the pieces that counts.
One of my M2's lost the hingepin on a back door. I simply covered it with black cloth tape and kept shooting. Changing film included sticking baseplate and back door in the pocket whilst doing it! My plan was to fix it that "next week" - I kept on using it for 6 month and by chance found a good back door in a junk box in a 2nd hand camera store for something like $10. I figured out that was getting cheaper than buying that expensive 2" wide black cloth tape (cost me almost $8). No vulcanite left on the replacement door either - but the tape worked fine there too.

[helenhill]

M2 in Action...

[rogerzilla]

Originally Posted by furcafe

Reminds me of the factoid, possibly apocryphal, that the width of the standard railroad gauge is pretty much the same as the width of roads going all the way back to the days of the ancient Persian empires due to network & legacy effects based on the size of horse & oxen-drawn wagons.

George Stephenson copied an existing NE England colliery gauge used by horse-drawn wagons. Actually, that was 4'8" and he added a bit to avoid binding on tight curves. The origin of the 4'8" colliery gauge is lost in the mists of time but (a) it was indeed necessary for a horse to walk between the rails and (b) a 4'8" internal gauge implies a 5' external gauge with the lighter colliery rails, which is a nice round number. Railway gauges were originally measured from the outside faces, as putting flanges on the inside of the wheels - at which point only the spacing of the inner faces matters - wasn't the first thing that was tried.

Brunel, of course, started from the ground up and decided 7'0 1/4" was the way to go, but standard gauge was already more common and cheaper, so Brunel's broad gauge was basically the Betamax of the 19th century.

[mynikonf2]

Yes, taken pictures is why I have the cameras...

[maddoc]

Taking photos WITH the M2... OK !

[sooppi]

hi, since we are on m2 topic. do you guys think this can be salvage? i would love to own and try an m2 too but don't have a lot of money to spend. how much would salvaging this thing cost? any idea?
http://cgi.ebay.com/Leica-M2-Silver-...QQcmdZViewItem

[mynikonf2]

Originally Posted by sooppi

hi, since we are on m2 topic. do you guys think this can be salvage? i would love to own and try an m2 too but don't have a lot of money to spend. how much would salvaging this thing cost? any idea?
http://cgi.ebay.com/Leica-M2-Silver-...QQcmdZViewItem

That's funny, I was just looking at this camera & wondering myself. This camera looks like it took a hard hit on the viewfinder window. That would be my biggest concern with this camera. Everything else looks cosmetic.
Myself, I'd pass on this one.

[Benjamin Marks]

Soopi:

Well, that M2 certainly has taken some abuse. I see evidence of a least three major impacts. I would want to know:

1) no glass cracked.
2) RF patch clear
3) no light leaks.
4) film advance functions smoothly.
5) if/when shutter last overhauled.
6) no water damage.

Even if you "won" this camera for $10.00 US, you should count on another $100-250 US minimum in CLA (clean, lube, adjust) by a competent repair person, plus more for replacement parts if needed. If the shutter curtains had never been replaced, it is a good bet they will need to be after you get the camera (it is over 50 years old). The good news is that these cameras are pretty robust and were designed to be adjusted and maintained. Still, it would be a gamble. And if I couldn't get my hands on a camera like this to see/hear for myself how bad the damage was, I would only buy it at a steep discount. You might call someone like Sherry Krauter or Don Goldberg, explain the situation to them and ask what, if anything, such a camera would be worth for parts.

Note: Seller states that there is no return of the camera and he is making no representations about its condition other than what you see on e-bay.

Ben Marks

[sooppi]

thank you for the inputs everyone

Dear tom,
what is a copystand camera? how can you tell?

[Tom A]

Leica used to make HUGE copystands for document photography. These Reprovits came in various sizes and used either LTM or M-mount cameras. They used to make a series of bodies with no rangefinder (1F/1G/ Md/Mda) that would be mounted on a sliding focussing plate. You focussed with a loupe like device - slide the camera in place and shot. Often these were used for slide presentations, documenting on to fine grain "Doku" type film and also providing high quality negs for publications. (Pre scanners and digital projectors with computer generated "shows").
As the Md/Mda's were wearing out or just not within the budget, M2's and M3's were substituted. These camera were used heavily - 100 000's of exposures, usually at slow speed (1 sec to 1/15). They often look fine, but the heavy indent on the shutter speed dial at 1s/1/2s/1/4sec etc and a usually rattly film advance, as well as a almost "grooved" pressure plate can attest to the amount of film having been pushed through.
IF a camera looks pretty nice on the outside, but the shutter only seems to work in the extreme slow speeds, pressure plate is polished and grooved and the geartrain is worn down to small "knubbies" on the advance shaft - suspect that it has been used heavily!
In itself it is not fatal, but a CLA can be very costly as a lot of parts can be worn out. Another problem was that these M2/M3 were usually sourced from trade ins and often they were sold cheap as they had faulty finders. Delaminated prism's etc. This did not affect the use as a copy camera (focus was through an independent system).
Occasionally you come across these cameras with big dents and bent advance levers. Not all operators of these Reprovits treated them with the true deference that a Leica is supposed to generate. They were dropped, thrown into boxes and drawers etc.
I have a couple of the MDa's and a MD-2 (based on the M4-2) as well as a M2 that served many years in a medical facility - making slides of pathology samples.
Some years ago I saw a Leicaflex SL that had served the same purpose and as it was attached to an academic institution with a deep love of book keeping - they knew that this camera had exposed 1,7 million images. At 1 million, Leica had looked at it and decided that there was at least another million images left in it to shoot! The metal below the advance lever was so worn down that it felt like 0.1mm shim stock!