RE: [Leica] Expectant proud new M6 owner

["Dan Honemann" <ddh@home.com>]

Simon,

I went through the same mighty struggle deciding between the .72 and .85
versions.  What finally made my decision for me (along with many, many
comments by other owners here) was looking through both finders side by
side.  As an eyeglass wearer, the 35 framelines are barely visible on the
.72 finder and all but impossible to see on the .85.  The 28 frames are
impossible to see in the .72 even though folks tell me they're there. :)

The 28 frame lies _outside_ the scope of the full finder in the .85 model,
so you may well "get peripheral things in the image" if you use that focal
length.

I also discovered that the frames are not _that_ much bigger for the 90 and
50 in the higher mag. version--not enough to cost me the usability of the 35
frames, anyway.  And many on this list have assured me that accurate
focusing even with the 90 APO is quite possible with the .72.

Finally, my decision not to go with the Tri-Elmar was based on speed.  While
you get the convenience of three focal lengths in one lens, it comes at the
price of several stops, as the Tri-E is an f/4 lens.  For me, that negates
one of the big advantages of using an M: shooting with available light.

Regards,
Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Simon Lamb
> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 7:01 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Expectant proud new M6 owner
>
>
> Lucien wrote:
> >
> > Simon,
> >
> > With the Tri-Elmar a M6 0.72 will be better, there is no
> > frames for the 28mm in the 0.85.
> >
> > Lucien
>
> Lucien
>
> I thought the .85 had an expanded measruing base for the rangefinder and
> therefore provides better focussing accuracy.  I know that the
> framelines are missing for the 28mm focal length.  However, I am not
> sure how much I would use the 28mm over the 35mm and 50mm lengths of the
> Tri-Elmar.  It seemed a much more cost effective way of obtaining three
> focal lengths in one lens rather than buy the 35mm f/2 (or the f/1.4)
> and the 50mm f/2.  Perhaps I need a rethink on this.
>
> Is my assumption correct that the focussing accuracy is better on the
> .85 over the .72 (it says it in the Leica- The Program book as well)?
> If I did want to use a 28mm with a .85, is it possible to get reasonable
> results if the image that I want to capture is covered by the
> viewfinder?  Admittedly I would get other peripheral things in the
> image.
>
> Simon
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Simon Lamb" <s_lamb@compuserve.com>
> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 9:33 AM
> Subject: [Leica] Expectant proud new M6 owner
>
>
> > Hello everyone
> >
> > Another lurker surfaces and faces the inevitable!  I have phoned the
> > camera shop and will be picking up my chrome M6 .85, 90mm f/2 APO ASPH
>
> > and Tri-Elmar 28-50mm f/4 on 2 May.  Just by way of introduction, I am
> a
> > Nikon user (F5, 80-200mm f/2.8 AFS, 85mm f/1.8 AF-D, TC20-E etc.
> etc.).
> > I love two types of photography, wildlife and portraits (particularly
> of
> > my two girls ages five and two - they are the subjects for the
> portraits
> > although sometimes the wildlife!).  I really wanted a camera that
> would
> > enable me to take protraits with more creative control and in a less
> > stressful way for the children.  The F5 with SB28 flash and big 85mm
> > lens can be very overpowering for children and it is difficult to take
>
> > candid portraits with such a big camera, even when using it handheld.
> I
> > have followed the newsgroup and believe that the M6 will be the ideal
> > camera for portrait work, especially with the 90mm f/2 in available
> > light.  I did consider the new Nikon S3 2000 rangefinder but it is
> very
> > much priced for the collectors market and did not make financial
> sense.
> > I also believe that the 90mm APO ASPH lens will be better than the
> 50mm
> > that Nikon will initially offer with the camera.
> >
> > I will keep the F5 as I do not believe that the M6 will be able to
> catch
> > the action wildlife shots that the Nikon makes possible.  The F5 is an
>
> > amazing camera, as is the M6, and I believe that each can offer me
> some
> > major benefts in the type of photography that interests me.
> >
> > One thing is for sure.  I have seen all the posts from new users and I
>
> > hope I have learnt many lessons, especially how to savour opening the
> > boxes and loading the first roll of film.
> >
> > I will, as appears customary, let you all know how my first days go
> with
> > my camera and hopefully become an active member of the newsgroup.  One
>
> > immediate question.  I take most of my portraits with Kodak Portra 160
>
> > NC.  Does the ISO dial on the back of the M6 allow 160 to be set?  I
> > notice some small increments between 100 and 200 and assume that these
>
> > are increments of 20, so that I can set the dial at three increments
> > past the 100 mark.  Is this a correct assumption?
> >
> > That's all for now.  Sorry it ended up so long.
> >
> > Simon
>