Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On 19 Mar 2001, at 20:40, Emanuel Lowi wrote: > I also converted the innards by installing an M3 rangefinder unit. All things > being equal otherwise, I can say that the M3 finder is a big help for viewing > and framing with my 50mm and 90mm lenses. But I also find that the M3 viewfinder > is slightly less bright than the former M6 unit. I am beginning to wonder > whether the increased brightness of today's M6 is the cause of the infamous > flare problem (note that most remedies for the problem involve dimming the > finder image with tape etc.). In any case, the differences in viewing with the > different eras of finders are not as huge in use as you may imagine (the larger > magnification of the M3 is great, but so is the brightness of today's .85 M6). Hi Emanuel, Out of interest I just performed a quick test of VF brightness between a relatively recently serviced M4, M6 0.72, M6 0.85 TTL and Mamiya 7II, I used a spot-meter to measure the area under the RF spot in the finder, the cameras were placed in the same relative position on a cabin light panel. Several measurements were taken (rough) and the consistent readings were: M4 (original 0.72 finder) f8 + 1/10 M6 (original 0.72 finder) f8 + 1/10 M6 0.85 TTL f5.6 + 9/10 Mamiya 7II f11 + 6/10 As you can see the relative brightness of the older non-flaring M4 finder is by my rough measurement identical in brightness to the classic M6. The finder patch flare is a function of the RF optics chain (AFAIK) which I wouldn't imagine could alter the overall brightness of the RF view? Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 Fax +61-2-9554-9259 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours audiob@ozemail.com.au http://www.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html