If your Leica does not look like this, then you are not shooting enough!

This has to be the coolest Leica I have ever seen.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?
ViewItem&category=30030&item=3855550637&rd=1

This is a camera that fulfilled it's mission.

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=30030&item=3855550637&rd=1

 

Pic:

 

Yeah, that's cool. But didn't you just have your camera painted because it
was looking a little beat? : ) Let's see you turn your yellow M4 into one of
these! And we'll look forward to seeing lots and lots of cool pix along the way!

 

I saw that auction, includes a 21, 3.4 SA I believe from the New York Times.

Pass

 

Nice camera with a great lens! For a user that was a great price too!

 

Yeah Al, even with a CLA for all, it was a good price. Is it more worn than your M2-R?

 

Let's just say that I had a double-stroke M3 that I sold within the past year or so that was in worse shape than this one. MUCH worse! But it still worked to perfection. The M2-R does look a bit rough though, with some brassing and dents.

 

I like Sal DiMarco's Leica.

 

Old soldiers never die, they just fade to ebay.............

 

>>This has to be the coolest Leica I have ever seen.<<

Sorry, but this is getting really strange. Who gives a hoot what a camera looks like? Anyone can buy a beat up old Leica, that doesn't make YOUR photos any better than if you have a beautiful new Leica, Nikon, Canon, Zeiss Ikon, Pentax, Olympus, what have you. If you want an ugly... oops I mean "cool" camera I can help you out... but it ain't going to make YOUR photos any better. Ugly or brand new hasn't made a nickels worth of difference in my photos. They suck! I, clearly, have other issues to work on with regards to my photos. Maybe you do too.

I'm starting to see the merits of Grant, Jeff, Eric, and Steve's messages... and that worries me.

 

click to see An M4 owned by a person known to shoot a few rolls of film....

 

from the cameraquest site:<BR><IMG SRC="http://www.cameraquest.com/jpg6/
M4_Winograd_7.jpg">

 

...and now really from the cameraquest site:<BR><IMG SRC="http://
www.cameraquest.com/jpg6/
M4_Winograd_7.jpg">

 

my M3 is between these conditions.Recently went for CLA and the technician asked prior to seeing it the serial number,it's in 1.1million."Oh!" He said, "a "collectors"! When he saw it...it was only about fixing it!Leicas are to be used! Not collected!

 

Jim Marshall's Leica M4.

 

Jim Marshall's Leica M4...

 

Elliott Erwitt's Leica M3.

 

Wow, nobody's called these cameras "sexy" yet. Maybe there's hope for this forum after all...

 

Sal diMarco's M2 cameras "Happy snaps" as Sal would say.

 

George Rodger's (one of the 4 founding members of Magnum) Nikon kit

 

label on the case

 

Hey - Elliots M3 has a filter on it - The LUG would lynch him!!!

 

Where do the photos of George Rodger's outfit come from?

 

The kit was auctioned by www.westlicht-auction.com.

Rodger shot Leica and Contax during the war, but seems to have switched to Nikon
rangefinders at some point. My guess would be, because the Contax series was
discontinued and the Nikon was a very similar in design or simply the fact that they were
cheaper and Rodger was often strapped for cash.

 

Where's Erwitt's F1s? Where are his EOS bodies? After all, he shoots with them more
than he does Leicas today (and for most of his commercial assignments)....

 

Feli, thanks for the Westlicht site. It's got great pictures and information.

 

"Where's Erwitt's F1s? Where are his EOS bodies? After all, he shoots with them more than he does Leicas today (and for most of his commercial assignments)...."

Try the Canon forums.

 

Nice point: scrub history while offering yourselves emotional bucking-up.

 

Here you go ...

 

Evidently Erwit didn't have a case for his Leica.

That pressure plate of Winogrand's reminds me of the Turin Shroud, which was shown to be a medieval fake, if I remember correctly. Anyway, it sure didn't happen in Winogrand's active lifetime.