Leica, precision, life, the universe and everything...

[charles barcellona www.bl]

I read all the posts about the lens that would not fit on another persons M7 and it spurred my memory, recalling serveral discussions I had some years back with a noted engineer friend of mine.

 

<p>

 

We both are into guns and photography (as well as other items), and it was noted, that the Leica was nice and well made, but then again, so is the DWM Luger. For those uninitiated, the Luger, the bastion of machining precision, is wonderfully made, and a jam waiting to happen. Our 1911 .45 pistol, as issued, was sloppy but seemed to work through thick and thin.

 

<p>

 

Similarly, and rather bigotedly, we determined that mechanical excellence, and high precision must vary according to the culture.

 

<p>

 

German - each adjustment has its own locking set screw, and counter screw, use as many adjustments as can concievably be made to fit the design

Japanese - design it such that all tolorance falls into one place, and make that place or item adjustable only to factory trained, sworn to secrecy technicians

American - just bend the damn thing with a pliers or hammer till it either works or nobody notices its messed up

Russian - weld it in place

 

<p>

 

Just food for thought.... (and I'm still thrilled my lens works now!~)

[george_l._doolittle]

Then why are rangefinder Leicas the camera of choice for ascents up

Mt. Everest, thru jungles, deserts, battlefields, etc. ? ...

[schopke]

Good Point. All the precision - when one SMALL adjustment is a micron

out of adjustment it no longer works correctly. Good think Leica's

are pretty reliable!

[roberto_watson_garc_a]

It reminds me of a Spanish film from the 60´s or 70´s, where a vivid

amatheur photographer is also a skilful asesin, it lets see the

relationship of the two instuments used by the killer, guns and

cameras.

[phillip-robert]

I know this is a bit off topic, but:

Charles, granted, the m1911 was pretty reliable. But, it was so

sloppily made that it was no where NEAR as accurate a Luger. So much

so that an entire industry was built up around manufacturing new

parts for M1911's to make them accurate.

 

<p>

 

You don't see after market accesories to make a Leica more "sharp" or

to make a Leica lens "faster" (nor do you see these aftermarket items

for Lugers).

 

<p>

 

~Phillip

[andy_piper2]

..since Charles mentions "everything" in his title...

 

<p>

 

A couple of items:

 

<p>

 

RE "bend and fix" My first personal camera was a Canon FX - predecesor

to the FT/FTb etc. I dropped it the first week I had it abd dented the

corner near the film advance lever. Result - the frame counter 'froze"

at 36.

 

<p>

 

After several months of counting exposures on masking tape, I got fed

up, took off the top, studied the mechanism, took out a bell crank in

the frmae-counter ratchet, bent it a mm or so, put it back, and the

camera worked fine until I sold it 15 years later.

 

<p>

 

RE Lugers and Leicas

 

<p>

 

Several months ago the History Channel did a series on "Weapons of the

20th century". There was one very telling comment on the Luger, which

has a much more angled handgrip/clip than, e.g. the 45. One of the

Luger afficiandos pointed out that with that grip, if you close your

eyes and just point your hand at the target, once you open your eyes

the sights of the gun are usually sitting right on the target. It is a

very ergonomic design, like those bent-handle hammers and pliers.

 

<p>

 

OTOH, that sharper angle to the ammunition stack may be part of the

reason for the Luger's jamming tendencies - the bullets have to slide

forward more as they move up the clip, as well as upward.

 

<p>

 

Incidentally, the basic Luger design originated with a American

engineer of German descent, who wound up selling/licensing/having-it-

copied by a German company (the exact events escape me) after the US

Army turned down the design.

[andy_piper2]

I meant to add (back on topic) that the description of the Luger's

ergonomic aiming tendencies gave ME a thrill of recognition - it is

exactly the same kind of feeling I get holding/aiming an M body.

[david_kelly1]

1. the camera of choice on Everest, and K2, and in the jungle (e.g. of

Vietnam) has been far more often Nikon than leica. The rangefinder of

the latter is quite vulnerable to shock; whereas a mechanical Nikon

is, in legendary repairman Marty Forscher's phrase, "a hockey puck."

2. the Luger's trigger is so awful that the accuracy of the piece is

mnore theoretical than real. That of the Colt 1911 can be tuned to a

platonic crispness, which is why it remains the weapon of choice in

prectical pistol competition..........

[furcafe]

FWIW, the official cameras for Sir Edmund Hillary's historic

ascent of Everest were actually Zeiss Ikon Contax II's (& maybe

III's) donated by Life magazine (although he & Norgay Tenzing

took pictures @ the summit w/Hillary's personal Kodak Retina).

From the 1930s to the mid 1950s, the Contax II & III were the

preferred 35mm RFs for many, if not most, professionals,

particularly war photographers (like Capa), field scientists, &

others who needed a tough, precision camera w/the best lenses

in the world. I think it was another 5-10 years until the 1st wimpy

Leica made it to the top of Everest.

[__]

Thanks, Chris. I've been saying for years that Leica isn't a good

choice for tough climatic conditions.

[chris_chen4]

Oliver:

 

<p>

 

Here's an old <a

href="http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/v04/msg03176.html">post</a>

from the LUG by Zeiss expert Marc James Small. It looks like I was

wrong, maybe Leica didn't get to Everest until '82!

[michael_kastner]

... my three pfennigs worth (ja, dammit, these things don't exist here

anymore either)...

<ol TYPE=a>

<li>

Of course, Leica Ms' and Rs' numerical standings are all peanuts in

comparison

with those of  Nikon or Canon. Just keep your eyes on newspaper

and

TV reportings!</li>

 

<p>

 

<li>

Everybody talks about the Luger. I favour the Mauser C96

(broomhandle).

Now <b>that</b> was a real German issue. Even got into Chinese

copies.</li>

 

<p>

 

<li>

To get back to your subject <i>("Leica, precision, life, the universe

and

everything... ")</i>, I am absolutely certain that the best thing here

is that which I like the very most about all this German stuff. Yes,

it

is also a saying in their advertisements: Here, with an M, you're the

boss,

not the camera. I'm not sorry to say I love that characteristic.</li>

</ol>

[scott_gant2]

<html>

<head>

<meta http-equiv="content-type"

content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">

<title></title>

</head>

<body style="background-image: url(about:blank);">

I know that this thread is pretty old, but it's time to put the "Leicas

are delicate and not suited to heavy, on location type shooting" myth to rest.<br>

<br>

For instance, Frank Van Riper of the Washington Post put it this way:<br>

<br>

<span style="font-style: italic;">"...tales of alleged Leica

shortcomings are matters of degree, especially when compared to today's

plastic-bodied, electronics-filled, temperamental and skittish SLRs.

For example, I once dropped my metal M6 onto the pavement and I swear I

thought I could hear it laugh. For the record, not only was the camera

unharmed; I couldn't even find a scratch on it."</span><br>

<br>

For the full story, check out <a

href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/essays/vanRiper/030522.htm">this

article.</a><br>

</body>

</html>