Which field of view (and correlated lens width) is covered by the entire viewfinder of respecitvely the M3 and the 0.85?

Does anyone regularly use 35mm on M3 and/or 28mm on 0.85, without an additional viewfinder?

-- Thomas Lofqvist (thomas.lofqvist@brevlada.com), April 11, 2002

Answers

Don't know about the 0.85. I use the 35 mm asph on an M3 without an additional viewinder. I've found it to be as good as the frames on the M6, which after all are only an approximation for any given distance. Before that, I used a pre-asph 35 mm the same way.

You will find that some people here don't agree, but it works for me. That is, after all, what counts. ;<)

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), April 11, 2002.

I think the field of view provided by the entire M3 VF is closer to the 40mm focal length, @ least in comparison to what I see through my 35mm accessory VF (an old Zeiss Ikon for Contax RF). However, I wear glasses & may not be seeing as much of the M3 VF as others. I haven't used a 35mm on my M3, since I have an M2, but do use a 40mm M-Rokkor on the M3 all the time.

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@NOSPAMcris.com), April 11, 2002.

I replaced an RF Summicron with a new pre-ASPH Summicron and use it on an M3. Before buying the new lens, I compared the framing of the RF Summicron with the outer edge of the M3 viewfinder and found it to be very close. I simply carry a piece of black electrician's tape placed so that I can push it down over the center frame window when using the new 35. This blanks out the frames leaving only the window.

Since I haven't used the new lens very much, my experience is somewhat limited but I think it works fine if you don't wear glasses.

-- Bud (budcook@attglobal.net), April 11, 2002.

In my experience, the M3 whole finder shows a 40mm field of view, making it a good camera to use the 40 Summicron or Rokkor on. 35mm is not that wider than 40, so you could definately use it in a pinch without a finder if you don't mind getting a bit more on film than you see in the finder.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), April 11, 2002.

Bud:

Yeah, that is what I do. Isn't it great to have a viewfinder without all of that extra crap in the way.

Art

-- Art (AKarr@90975@aol.com), April 11, 2002.

Since I shoot only Kodachrome for slides, a little extra subject doesn't bother me because it's covered by the mount. As for the viewfinder, I still can't get used to frames w/o corners:-)

-- Bud (budcook@attglobal.net), April 11, 2002.

Hi all,

I own the 0,85 M which I use with 50, 90 and now 35 (not perfect in this last topic); I suppose, but I can't really affirm that the full viewfinder view is very near to the 28 mm field. I was ready to use it if I had found a secondhand 28, but I didn't so, more carrefully, I bought the 35. Any try or advise on this point of view? For my "culture", am I true? Alain

-- alain.besancon (alain.besancon@chu-dijon.fr), April 12, 2002.