Re: [Leica] .85X M6

[Jon Louch <jlouch@sprint.ca>]

Thanks for your comments. My first lens will be the 35mm f 2.0 ASPH, the next will
probably be the 90mm F/2.8. I don't understand the reference to the red dot. Jon

TTAbrahams wrote:

> Jon, I have had my M6HM or 0,85 for about a month now. I did take it to Rome
> for two weeks ( just back a couple of days ago). I have waited for this model
> since they told me at Leica that they could not put a M3 finder in my first M6
> and retain the metering (1986) and then they said that they could not make me
> a black,non-engraved M6J for a reasonable price. They sometimes take a long
> time to react. Well enough griping, I shoot about 40 rolls with the 0,85 in
> Rome and London ( about 50 % of the film used). With the 50 and 90 it is a
> gods end. You can actually see what is happening in the frame with the 90 and
> the 50 is big enough to give you a good eyeful and still retain the M-facility
> of being able to see whats going on outside the frame. I did run some rolls
> through it with the 75 prior to going and it works very well, it feels like
> you are shooting with a 50 Nocti or -Lux.
>  With the 35 you are basically getting everything you can see through the
> viewfinder and probably a bit more as you cant see the lines ( at least not
> with glasses).
>  My judgement is that it is a very worthwhile M camera, I would not not
> recommend it as your first M6, it doesn't work that well with the 35. I will
> use it as my 2nd body, a regular M6 with the 35 on it and the HM/0,85 with the
> 50 or 75/90 combination is a rather complete camera package ( its what I call
> a 90% package, you can do 90 % of most photography with that set of 2 bodies
> and 3 lense and the extra 9% would be a 21 Asph ( the remaining 1% needs
> really specialized stuff)..
>  The only marginal problem I had with 0,85 was that the rangefinder patch
> occasionally " flared out" on me.i,e it went white and difficult to see. This
> was not a big problem, it happend when the light was strong sidelight ( left
> hand side) and in all the cases I only had to shift the camera a fraction to
> get the patch back.
>  For all the complains about Leica, the camera functioned flawlessly, very
> smooth release and no sense of looseness or faulty functions.
>  If you have been using the regular M6 it takes a bit of thinking to correct
> for the meter on the M6HM. The meter pattern for the 35 takes in a larger
> porton of the viewfinder than on the regular M6 ( a function of the
> viewfinder) and after 10 years of shooting with the regular M6 I have
> established subconscious parameters for my metering, particularly with the 35
> ( my preferred lens). Occasionally with the HM I kept thinking that I had
> screwed up as I was mentally metering with the smaller acceptance angle of the
> regular M6 and strong sidelights or specular highlights that I thought were
> outside the "meter pattern" interfered with the values. This is not a
> criticism, just a matter of getting used to it. I did find that I used the 90
> more than usual with the HM, composition is easier and judging from the first
> batch of 40-45 rolls of black and white rolls that I have run, focussing
> accuracy is improved with the bigger frame.
>  In short I like it and congratulate Leica on a good design, and yes I have
> taped over the red dot!!!
>  Tom A