![]() ![]() The move to Canada was not a new thing they had built Cameras in Canada before but the assembly method and production parts changes were a challenge.īetween the design changes (perceived by many as downgrades) and the quality issues due to the parts and manufacturing changes, the M4-2 is perceived as a less desirable M by some and a bargain find by others. But the real change was a move away from hand assembled and custom tuned parts to mass produced parts and assembly. There were a variety of changes some cosmetic, like the move to a stamped top plate from an engraved one. They pushed the M4 back into production as a stop gap and then launched a redesigned more economical (read: profitable) model the M4-2. By all reports the company was in trouble. The CL joint venture with Minolta was successful in the market but not as profitable as Leica needed. The Liecaflex SLR showed that Leica was not Nikon or Canon. It did not get much traction. ![]() The 1971 M5 was a deviation from the classic M body that was not well received by the market. Produced from 1977 to 1981, the M4-2 was either the death of the classic M or the return by Leica to the true path and salvation of the brand. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |