I've been contemplating the purchase of an M6 w/ 35mm Summicron for a couple of months. Leica's reintroduction of the rebate program is making it more attractive for me to look at a new M6 TTL than a used M6 'Classic'.

I wear glasses, and I when I tried out the 0.72 model at my local dealer, I could only see approx. 70% of the area within the 35mm frameline. I asked about the 0.58 viewfinder. The dealer only had the 0.72 and the 0.85 models in stock, and he tried to convince me that the lower magnification of the 0.58 model causes problems focusing the faster Summilux and Noctilux lenses, and virtually rules out the 90mm focal length lenses. He also doubted whether he would receive a 0.58 model for many months. I know he wants me to buy from stock, but is there any foundation in his comments about faster & longer lenses?

Eventually I found another dealer in the Denver area with a 0.58 model (black rather than silver chrome, which is what I really want). The 35mm frameline was clearly visible, with a small border around it. Perfect for my immediate needs, but I suspect I will want a 50mm Summilux and/or a 90mm Elmarit in due course. A 2nd body with a higher magnification finder is out of the question for now, so should I be concerned that I'm buying the 'wide-angle, slow lens only' model?

For those of you who have compared the two viewfinders, what's your take on my local dealer's comments?

Thanks in advance, Stuart

-- Stuart Dorman (mountainjunkie@qwest.net), May 07, 2001

Answers

http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/technics/rfaccuracy.html

The most important thing is that you get a comfortable view of your most commonly used wide angle lens. In the rangefinder effectice baselength world longer is better but I think that the 0.58 will be fine for the 90/2.8 and 50/1.4. The 50/1.0, 75/1.4 and 90/2.0 might require a great deal of practice when used wide open and close.

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@home.com), May 07, 2001.

Stuart,

For what it may be worth, I wear bi-focals, use a 72 M6 TTL as well as a III F. I do not have any difficulties in either focusing or seeing all frames lines. I use a 35 'cron a 90 'cron an a 50 Cosina Nokton. While the latter intrudes into the viewfinder, I have gotten used to it and have no problems composing. I, too, tried all three VF versions but settled on the 72 so as not to limit my choice of lenses.

J-D.

-- Jean-David Borges (jdborges@home.com), May 07, 2001.

From a fellow Front-ranger;

I have a Hexar RF which has essentially a .58 finder. I have had a few problems focusing my 90 at f/2.0, but none with anything shorter. And remember that the Konica rangefinder is not quite up to Leica standards (the secondary image moves around if you shift your eye, throwing off focus...plus mine is out of adjustment - it's just so much fun that I haven't been able to part with it long enough to send it in for warranty fix yet.)

And if I'm careful, it WILL even focus the f/2 most of the time.

I do dream of a 1.00x finder with 50-135 frames for the longer guys.

But, in short, I would not hestitate to use an Elmarit on the Leica .58 or the Konica - and being able to see a 28mm frame with space around it (!!) is SOoo liberating!!

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), May 07, 2001.

I shoot alot with a Minolta CLE which is also a .58 mag finder. I have no trouble shooting the 50mm f2.0 wide open at close distances. When I use it with a 90, I have more of a problem framing than focusing. The tiny 90 box coupled with a rangefinders "approximate" framing makes it difficult to do precise compositions. I do not have this problem using the 90 on an M3, which is I think .91 magnification. I still use the 90 with the CLE and have made many super sharp 8X12 prints from this combo.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), May 07, 2001.

I wear glasses and use 0.72 M6's. I found out that by wearing glasses frames that are smaller and more flexible plus getting the "featherweight"-type lenses that are thinner than most, I can press my eye much closer to the eyepiece and if I look straight ahead (don't scan with my eyes)I perceive the entire 35 frame. The 28 frame is impossible to see in one glance even without glasses, but I prefer an accessory 28 finder because it mimics the spatial characteristics of the 28 (foreground vs background size) better than the camera's viewfinder. I have the Hexar and can see the entire 28 frame but I still prefer the accessory finder. As far as focusing accurately, I've used the 135/3.34 APO-Telyt wide open at its 1.5m close focusing limit on the Hexar and got sharp results. By contrast I was almost never able to sharply focus my 75 Summilux on the 0.72 Leica. One trick I use sometimes when I'm using my Komura 2x with the 135, is to hold an SLR viewfinder magnifier (mine's an old Minolta but most manufacturers make them) up to the eyepiece, which magnifies just the center (rangefinder patch) by 2x. It doesn't really increase the effective baselength but it makes it easier to see the rangefinder images coincide on very fine details or far away.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), May 07, 2001.

Thanks to everyone for your answers. This forum is a mine of information. I especially appreciated John's link to Erwin Puts' article, which gives me a better appreciation for the physics. However, first-hand experiences of .58 owners and .72 owners with glasses also helps in a big way. I don't see 100% of the viewfinder on my Canon F1, so I wind up scanning with my eye. However, it seems like I see less of the Leica .72 viewfinder than of my Canon. And from what I've read it seems that being able to see around the framelines in the Leica actually helps improve composition, especially if the framelines are approximate at best.

I hadn't thought about changing my spectacle frames as a possible solution. Having tried contact lenses many years ago, I won't go that route again, and I still have suspicions about lasik. That's a whole different discussion thread, and I won't go there. But thanks for being sensitive enough not to state those alternatives. I suspect other forums might have elicited that type of response. I'll try my backup glasses with thinner frames when I next demo the .58 and .72 side-by-side.

Looking forward to Leica ownership in the near future.

Cheers,

-- Stuart Dorman (mountainjunkie@qwest.net), May 08, 2001.

A follow-up trip to S&S Optika in Denver presented me with perhaps the best alternative for me: the .72 finder with a -3 diopter correction lens. I'm thinking it'll be close enough to my prescription (my right eye is -3.25) to make focusing easy and get to see the 35mm frameline in the .72. Actually the Leica rep happened to be at the store, and she dissuaded me from buying the .58, saying it was a very specialized camera. She also suggested the (new?) accessory 21/24/28 viewfinder for when I decide to go for a wider- angle lens in the future.

I'm getting to borrow an M6 classic w/ a 35 Summilux over the weekend, just to make sure that rangefinder photography is right for me. Sadly no correction lenses are available, but it beats the limited photographic opportunities within a camera store!

Cheers, Stuart

-- Stuart Dorman (mountainjunkie@qwest.net), May 10, 2001.