I need to know how good is the .85 M6 body for framing with a 35mm lens. I use no glasses.

Julian Cardona

-- Julian Cardona (jssuliana@hotmail.com), November 26, 2001

Answers

Julian, I use a .85 M6 with my 35 ASPH Summicron without any problems, although admittedly I use the 50 Summicron marginally more than my 35. Some prefer the .72 camera especially with anything wider than 50mm. I do not wear glasses when I shoot, instead wearing contact lenses. My suggestion is to borrow or rent a camera to see if you are comfortable with the HM viewfinder with the 35mm focal length.

-- David (pagedt@chartertn.net), November 26, 2001.

I use a Voigtlander 35mm slip on viewfinder with my 35mm Summicron- Asph on my M3. I like it a lot. The finder is very bright and totally unobstructed. Works great at night too.

-- Dennis Couvillion (couvilaw@aol.com), November 26, 2001.

I tried it and did not like the fact I could not see the edges without "looking around" into the far corners of the finder. It isn't much different than using my old M3's whole finder as an aprroximation for what a 35mm lens will see. I do not use glasses by the way.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), November 27, 2001.

I also use a .85 M6 with a 35lux and it works fine for me. But you will definitely not be able to see a subject moving into the frame lines. For streetphotography this is a minus. To me this combo is a bit like an SLR where you see the whole frame. Best to try out for yourself. Regards,

Harro de Wilde

-- Harro de Wilde (hdewilde@uni-one.nl), November 27, 2001.

I know you said you didn't need glasses, but for the information of my compatriots in myopia I should point out that using my 35 with my 0.85 is a real strain, albeit just about possible. I like the idea of the 35 external viewfinder by voigtlander...

-- stephen jones (stephenjjones@btopenworld.com), November 27, 2001.

I agree with the others. On a 0.72, I can see the 35mm framelines, fine, but they are on the edge of my vision. With the 0.85 this is not possible. I do however, wear glasses. I think if you did not wear glasses you could see them fine, but it is always nice to have some space around the framelines. With the viewfinder magnifier available now, I think I would get the 0.72 and use the magnifier if you wanted to get 0.85 type magnification.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), November 27, 2001.

Hi Julian,

What do you mean exactly, "how good... for framing?" If you mean how accurate the lines are, I haven't tested but I doubt they are hyper accurate. Apparently good enough though 8-)

If you mean, can you see much outside the frame, in order to correctly time shots? Forget it. Even without glasses, I feel a little eye strain and have to get uncomfortably close to the machine to see the whole frame, not to mention anything at all outside.

I'd never out of choice shoot a 35mm with a .85. Then again, I don't even think a .72 has enough outside the frame with 35mm (esp. with glasses). The .72 is reasonable and useable, just not optimal 8-)

(Remember that M's have a grab bag of good factors, and everybody has a few things they love and can't give a toss for the rest. I don't care about battery-free operation, "quiet" operation, "magic" "tonality" (that no-one seems to want to give back- to-back comparison scans of), "great wide-open performance" doesn't mean crap when DOF is 5mm thick and I'm hand-holding at 1/8 on 640 film, etc. I bought the M's for the unique combination of big aperture and small size. But I **love** the M's for the LOOFE (Leica out-of-frame experience) and (back on topic) for me the .85 is just this side of unusable with this lens.)

-- Frank Sheeran (fs@bsag.ch), November 27, 2001.