That really depends on the person doing the work. Even though I was an aircraft mechanic for 21 years I wouldn't do it - not my expertise. But when I watch my guy do it (he's also a swiss-certified watchmaker) I have full confidence that what I'm getting back is going to be better because of his work, and it is.Disassembling a Leica for routine maintenance is an invasive procedure, possibly more damaging to the camera than using it without routine maintenance.
I looked at the manual of my 553ELX (not a Leica, but equally complex) and it recommends having the camera services in no specific intervals "now and again", and strongly recommends a 6 months schedule in case of shooting "several hundreds of film per week".Many things are common knowledge in car maintenance, but car manufacturers always, with no exception, publish maintenance details for every car model they make.
Many appliances/devices (consumer or professional) have recommended maintenance plans clearly defined in user manuals. Funny that Leica never ever felt the need to mention vital information that M cameras require periodic service even if there is no apparent issue in operation. Maybe they want their cameras to brake (but as we can see that plan hasn't been working very well)...
Disassembling a Leica for routine maintenance is an invasive procedure, possibly more damaging to the camera than using it without routine maintenance. Since 1953 Leica rangefinder cameras have been my preferred cameras except where through-the-lens viewing or larger formats were more appropriate. None have ever had (or needed) routine maintenance. None have ever failed, even in arctic cold and desert heat, except from extreme abuse. Photographers who must produce results upon demand are certainly justified in relying on preventative maintenance and always having back-up equipment. I have rarely been burdened with this responsibility. Other photographers with different goals and greater responsibilities are justified in much different approaches to routine maintenance. Discussions like this are useful in comparing our experiences with those of others. We each should evaluate our needs and our resources, and act accordingly.
I beg to differ. Just like you service your car you should service a Leica. A good technician can get a Leica running as sweet as a nut with just the right amount of oil and cleaning of rangefinder optics and lens. Try it and you will notice the difference both in handling and results.
My Rolleiflex 3.5 f ran perfect after 40 years. Then Harry took it in for service and 15 years later it needs another service. I don't care I've not used it much, it was hardly used over its first 40 years and ran perfect.
Most marriages will last a lot longer without any counselling.
I beg to differ. Just like you service your car you should service a Leica. A good technician can get a Leica running as sweet as a nut with just the right amount of oil and cleaning of rangefinder optics and lens. Try it and you will notice the difference both in handling and results.
Looking at the high prices (new and pre-owned) of Leicas then and now, what exactly is the "gamble" of not servicing them?
I'm sorry but I'm not going to buy a £50 lens from anybody only to then spend £150 on having it serviced. It's more efficient to use some judgement and buy a good lens in the first place.
Common knowledge to whom? Leica Ms & Nikon Fs & F2s didn't seem to get that memo.....
In early 1960s one of the consumer guide magazines queried the camera repair shops and asked, of the various camera brands, which ones were the most serviced. In those days most of the shops, such as Morty Forscher, were geared towards servicing professional photographers. The magazine then claimed Leicas, Nikons, and perhaps Rollei, to be cameras that buyers should avoid.
Bad/incomplete data leads to bad conclusions.
In early 1960s one of the consumer guide magazines queried the camera repair shops and asked, of the various camera brands, which ones were the most serviced. In those days most of the shops, such as Morty Forscher, were geared towards servicing professional photographers. The magazine then claimed Leicas, Nikons, and perhaps Rollei, to be cameras that buyers should avoid.
Bad/incomplete data leads to bad conclusions.
As does good data that is misunderstood.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?