RE: [Leica] Quality Control and Leica Durability

["Jack F. Matlock" <jfmatlo@ibm.net>]

Iain:

>You wrote:
>
>The questions arise though about where a manufacturer's 
responsibilty
>     for reliabilty ends, and is Leica design and quality 
control good
>     enough for the price we pay?

Actually, it is hard to judge the manufacturer's responsibility 
for used equipment unless you are certain that the camera has 
not been subject to rough usage.

My experience has been that I cannot always predict from the 
reputation how durable a given model will be.  For example, I 
acquired both an R-4 and R-4SP used, mint minus and Ex+ 
respectively, and have had no trouble at all, despite the 
reputation that the former, at least, had for being troublesome. 
(I did have to replace the gasket around the small window in the 
DB back of one, but that was no big deal.)

Last year I also bought an R6, Mint minus, from Uri in Illinois, 
and on the 6th or 7th roll of film the film advance went out. 
 Cost me $350. to have repaired.  And the R-6, as a mechanical 
SLR, should be more durable than the R-4 series.  So -- averages 
are averages and individual pieces of equipment have their 
individual character, including strengths and weaknesses.  I 
imagine that R-3's and R-4's that have not been abused and are 
still operating are pretty good bets, despite the reputation 
they acquired early on.

I've bought all my M's (M-2 and two M-6s) new and never had any 
trouble.  Only one CLE on the M-2  and its lenses after several 
years of shooting on beaches in Africa.   But the three-year 
warranty sure is a comfort.

Jack

jfmatlo@ibm.net