Re: [Leica] M6 TTLs...disappointment.

[thibault collin <tc-lnc@u-picardie.fr>]

Hey Bob,

I know that the current M6 should have a brighter viewfinder than the 1950s
models, it should be due to technology improvements. But it's not the case
anyway...finders are not brighter, even less than the older models. 
BTW, I do not like the new shutter speed button on the TTL, it's bigger but
does not feel better...
Of course you can look for an M3, I'm sure you'll find it gorgeous!
Thib.

At 06:33 28/02/1999 EST, you wrote:
>Thib:
>
>I found your post very interesting.  Although I do not have an M3 to compare
>to the TTL I certainly would have liked to.  After months of not really
>enjoying using my M6HM I came to the conclusion that the sources of my
>problems were twofold; my vision combined with the HM viewfinder.   I spent
>over an hour switching back and forth between my HM and a TTL .72.    I have
>concluded that the TTL is a bit brighter than my HM but the image is size in
>the viewfinder suits my eyesight better.  As you know the TTL viewfinder
>should be brighter due to the small increase in size.  With technology being
>what it is today I would think Leica could dramatically improve the viewfinder
>on the M6.  IMHO this would be more important than TTL.
>
>Perhaps I should look around for a mint M3.  What do you think?
>
>Bob Bedwell
>
><< There was a Leica show off yesterday at my local photo dealer. I had the
> opportunity to play with the new M lenses and new bodies as well as with the
> R8 +winder and some of the new ROM-equiped lenses. One first disappointment
> : The ROM lenses do not fit on the leicaflexes...it's too bad.
> Then I started to play with the two M6TTL 0.72 and 0.85. My first impression
> was terrible! The finders appeared to me as being not so bright and the
> framelines not so contrasty. So I took my old M2 and compared the view : the
> old M2 was much more brighter, even the rangefinder window and the
> brightlines were much better defined! What is going on? In 1999, the finders
> are not as bright as in 1959 or even before because another guy had a M3DS
> and agreed with me!
> There was really a huge difference even with an M4-P...
> My other disappointment is coming from the 0.85. IMHO, 0.85 makes a too
> small window for the 50 mm frame when compared to M3 and we can hardly see
> anything in the 35 mm frame (like the 28 for 0.72). So the one who wants a
> bright finder with contrasty brightlines and the best setup to use the 50 mm
> has to go back to the M3 with an exposure meter...
> It's too bad in 1999...
> Thib.
> 
> 
>  >>
>
>