max_wall

I realize this topic has been discussed pretty extensively before,

but I cannot locate the threads in the archives. So, if forum

members who have experience with non-metered Leicas would

assist me, I will be grateful. I purchased a black paint M-4, with

MR Meter, in 1970. The camera has been used sparingly, has

had a CLA by DAG, and is in great shape. The Leica Meter was

calibrated by DAG for current battery usage. However, it is not

functioning very well, i.e., needle sticking, etc. I

want to use the M-4 more, but not trusting the MR meter, I think it

is time to consider a replacement. What has worked for you?

Thanks.

Thanks, Al, for a thoughtful answer. However, I rarely shoot

slides, and when I do it is travel only, so I would not be packing

MF gear. Second, I do not do my own darkroom work, so that is

not a consideration. Therefore, apart from learning a different

system, it seems that the major issue is cost of MF lenses.

Right/wrong? Thanks for all input.

In context with the previous post, most (if not all) recommended

the SLR over the M for certain work, i.e., extreme close up,

abstract, etc.. I agree that the SLR is more versatile than an M,

but if one already has an M, but no SLR, why invest in another

35mm format system with its concomitant expense to satisfy an

infrequent need? Would it not make more sense to go the

medium format route for those needs, and use the M for those

applications which has made it famous? I realize that the cost

may be a little more, but one would be getting a larger negative,

as well as some of the other benefits found in the 35 mm SLR.

My post does not ask "where did we go wrong?", nor is it

intended to promote fighting among the brothers and sisters.

Instead it is a call to stewardship. If each member does not

assume a personal sense of responsibility for his/her actions,

then an unbridled "wild west behavior" is the result. I think we

all have had enough of that. There is a marked difference

between stewardship and ownership. While no one, or two, or

three, owns the forum, nevertheless, when any of us fails to be

good stewards of "our" forum, the community is diminished to

some degree. When enough fail to be good stewards, the forum

collapses under its own irresponsibility. My fellow members, I

am not on a crusade. I admit I write from a selfish motive: I want

to be the beneficiary of the best information, advice, and

experience I can find. While I do not believe that any person is

indispensable, I do think that some of the most knowledgeable

members have departed the scene. We are not, at least in the

short run, made better by their leaving. They have their reasons

for leaving. I respect that. But, I call them to consider their own

sense of stewardship. Stewardship implies that something has

been given for which the recipient is responsible. In their case,

the knowledge that has been acquired and the talent that has

been cultivated is perhaps best utilized when shared with those

less knowledgeable and talented, in a kind, caring, and

appropriate manner. That is all I am calling for. Among

intelligent and mature people is that too much to suggest?

Ray -

I could not agree with you more.

Roger -

Granted, people come and go, but I do not think it inappropriate

to give some thought as to why they do so. Sorry, but I do not

understand your reference to the Twelve Step Program. While I

am familiar with it in another context, I do not understand its

relevance to the post.

I have just returned from my daily walk, during which I pondered

the present state of the Leica Forum. As I walked along, I

attempted to mentally formulate what was taking place within

the forum in the light of the recent controversy, and actions taken

by forum moderators and members. While walking, mental

words came quickly and abundantly, and I felt they spoke to

some degree of truth and grace. Now that the blood has left my

brain and gone someplace else, I may only come across as a

"sounding gong or a clanging cymbal". Anyway, I hope you will

give a little time to what I have to say, and that the moderators do

not view it in the wrong way.

For almost forty years I was a church pastor. I found that

church's have much in common with every group of persons with

which I am familiar. Church members do not all think alike, even

though they profess belief and commitment to a common faith

and theology. It was my experience that the major causes of

difficulty and resentment that occasionally arose, had little to do

with theological belief , or matters of faith. Instead, they had their

genesis in personality conflicts. What started out as a benign

difference in opinion (over a variety of things), grew into a

malignant tumor that sometimes metastasized throughout the

congregation. People would choose sides. Reconciliation

became difficult. Of all places where grace should prevail, it

failed to take place.

While I am not comparing a church to the Leica Forum, there are

some similarities. For one thing, it seems to me that the forum

should be generally concerned with photography, and

specifically with Leica photography. When it veers off in the

direction of politics, religion, sexual orientation, etc., it loses sight

of why it was created to begin with. This tendency, as well as

caustic replies to posts and responses, have caused some of

us to lose sight of why we tune into the forum in the first place.

I discovered the forum almost three years ago. I had purchased

a new Leica and lenses, but I knew next to nothing about

photography, especially photography that utilized Leica

equipment. The forum was just what I needed. I raised some

very elementary questions about a variety of issues. There were

a few sarcastic replies, but the preponderance of responses

were kind and helpful. Some of the ones who have been vilified

the most were of greatest help. Sure, they were not always the

most graceful with their answers, and I must admit I was a little

incensed with some of them, but I figured that was their problem,

not mine. The forum became a treasure cove of information for

me. Every day there was something new and helpful. While I

had little interest in some of it, there was enough helpful

information rendered that I checked the site several times each

day. I made a few long-distance friends along the way. My

interest in Leica equipment and its use continued to grow. Now,

it has changed. Perhaps that is best, I do not know. There are

still many knowledgeable people who remain, but the questions

seem to have changed. Granted, no one individual is

indispensable to the forum. No two, or three, or four, maybe.

But, when we lose knowledgeable people (for whatever reason I

have been unable to understand), then our photography

community suffers. I do not plan to leave the forum because

someone has angered me, or they think differently from me

politically, religiously, or whatever. I frequent the forum to learn

about photography; specifically photography that makes use of

Leica equipment. I do not visit the site just to view photos. If

more information about the photo accompanied it, then I might

do so. The only reason I would leave would be when it ceases

to become an educational experience.

So, I would call the forum (present and former members) to

self-examination. It is my hope that those who have decided to

leave will reconsider and return. I can speak only for myself, I

need your expertise. I do not have to agree with your style of

imparting knowledge, but I do respect your wisdom and

experience. I do not want to go to another forum. This one has

served me well in the past, and it can serve me and others well

in the future - if we want it to.

Jack -

Thanks for the invitation. You were a gracious host in Carmel in

May, 2002, and we shall always remember you with fondness.

Our best to you and your family.

Best regards,

Max

P.S. It's nice to see your posts again.

Why has "our" forum come to this point in its life? Is it because

of a few individuals who make themselves known by their views

and opinions that have little, if anything, to do with why we

choose to participate in the forum in the first place? I think not.

When one stops and thinks about it, would not those persons

have little, if any, impact, if in our disagreement with them we

chose not to enter into the fray, knowing that to do so we become

a participant with them in the ultimate destruction of "our"

forum? <edited> So, to bring this homily to a close, I

challenge us all to just be mature enough to not throw fuel on an

unwanted fire. The forum can then become like a butcher shop

in that we do not have to buy the whole hog, but only that which

serves us best. Anything else is not relevant.

Well stated, Marc. For me to add anything more would be

superfluous.

Thanks, Jerry. This is exactly what I was looking for. I sent you

an e-mail in appreciation, but it was returned. Feel free to

contact me with any experiences you have had with the studio.

Again, I appreciate your response.

I am interested in purchasing a print of Edward Curtis' "Canyon

de Chelly". I do not know what to look for in a fine art dealer. For

instance, do most dealers procure their prints from a common

source? Are there some sources that do their own work

(perhaps more painstakingly) and charge accordingly? I am

having difficulty in expressing

myself, but I hope I am conveying my dilemma to forum

members. Any recommendations for top quality sources?

Thanks for the help.

The new Ultravid binoculars from Leica are touted to be a cut

above the highly vaunted Trinovids, and, arguably, the best in the

world. Have any of you forum members used, or purchased a

pair; and if so, what are your impressions?

I was stationed at Fort Ord as a U.S. Army chaplain (1967-68). I

cannot determine from the photo if this is my old chapel.

Thanks for the memories, Sanford.

A recent post about table tripods has piqued my interest once

more in tripods. Several forum members have said they use the

table tripod by bracing it on the chest. Does anyone have a

photo they would be willing to post depicting such utilization?

Also, from those who own both a table version and a standard

tripod, what percentage of use is devoted to each? Thank you.

David -

I received my new silver chrome MP this week. I could not be

more delighted! It fills the bill in every respect for me. It is exactly

what I had been hoping far - mechanically and aesthetically.

While some do not like the covering, in my opinion it is superior

to the traditional material, especially on the silver chrome finish.

The grip is excellent and it has a clean appearance. I cannot

see any difference in color between the covering on the back

door and the rest of the body. It is a beautiful camera that I look

forward to using for a long time.

I looked it up: OEM = Original Equipment Manufacturer. In other

words, the strap that came with the camera. Abbreviations save

time for those familiar with them, but waste time for the rest of

us.

<...I don't feel any discomfort with the OEM Leica Strap>

I am not familiar with the abbreviation "OEM". Does this refer to

the Neoprene strap, Order No. 14 162 (perhaps this number

has changed)?

Jay: What Op-Tech strap do you recommend for Leica M series

cameras? Thanks.

I have purchased several items from Sam and consider him very

reliable and trustworthy. I think he (better ask him) charges a

20% consignment fee. My experience with Sam has been

excellent.

Am I correct in my understanding that the only time the image

within the bright line frame of the Leica M is identical to the

image on the negative produced is at the closest focusing

distance of the lens being employed? For instance, my 11817

50mm Summicron's closest focusing distance is 0.7 m, or 27.5".

When I focus at exactly 0.7m, will everything (nothing more or

less) within the bright line frame appear on the negative (nothing

more or less)? I realize this is preschool for some on the forum,

but for some of us (maybe only me) it is postgraduate. Thanks,

as always.

I had my Leica-Meter MR recalibrated by DAG recently. I don't

know about "cool", but my MR meter gives very accurate readings

for my M4, and I purchased both in 1970. With the degree of

accuracy I get with the MR, I find no reason to "upgrade" to

another meter at this time.

Thanks, everyone. I appreciate your responses and helpful

advice. Max