Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/15

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Rangefinder/Distance Markings
From: jorge@cybernetrix.com (Jorge Fernandez)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 17:54:42 +0200

>>>> To All on the Lug,
>>>>=20
>>>> I recently had an opportunity to test a fairly old M3(59), a newer=20
>>>> M2(67), and a 1987 M6 for rangefinder accuracy with nine different =
M=20
>>>> lenses. All bodies in ex++ to mint condition without any dents. Why =
did=20
>>>> I do this? Lately, I've been noticing that certain lenses made a =
better=20
>>>> print than others. Since I usually apply hyperfocal or zone focus, =
I=20
>>>> just figured I was being too critical and used the next larger =
stop.
>>>> A test target that I used for focussing was marked off at 3, 6, 10, =
12,=20
>>>> and 15 feet.  Distances mainly selected because of the markings on =
the=20
>>>> lens barrels. The lenses ranged from 21/3.4 to 135/4. Since all =
lenses=20
>>>> seemed to focus at infinity, I stopped at 15' (besides, my room =
wasn't=20
>>>> big enough).
>>>> I used the same Leitz tripod at eyelevel (same as the target =
height) for=20
>>>> every camera/lens combination and also plumbed the film plane to =
each=20
>>>> distance mark on the ground.
>>>> To my surprise, only the M3 showed a consistent correlation between =
the=20
>>>> measured and the noted lens barrel distance *for every lens*.  Also =

>>>> interesting was the fact that the lenses which made a nicer print=20
>>>> happened to be the ones that matched to a particular body (if =
anyone=20
>>>> would like specific data, just ask).=20
>>>> Question: Since most of what I own was purchased used, does one =
have to=20
have the rangefinder roller assembly and lens(es) slope>>>> rarara =
checked out for every new >>>> addition? Thanks in advance for your =
comments.
>>>>=20
>>>> Jorge Fernandez
>>>> US Embassy, Madrid
>>>>=20