Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Tom Shea wrote: >The frame area for 135 is pretty small on a classic M6. If you want to use a >135 mm lens, you might consider using an M6HM. It is a significant >improvement. Good idea! Thanks for the tip. Maybe someday when I can afford it as a second body. But right now I'm saving for the 2 lenses I just have to have. I currently have the 35 Summilux Asph, 75 Summilux (Canada), 90 Elmarit (current). Oh the 2 lenses I have to have are the 21 Elmarit Asph and the 135 Tele-Elmar. About the M6HM, if you just take into account the change in viewfinder from .72X to .85X, I calculate that focusing a 135mm lens would be the equivalent of 124.5mm on the standard M6. Not much of an improvement. I think this would only be an increase in effective rangefinder base of from 49.9 to 54.1. Yet Leica claims an increase in effective rangefinder base from 49.9 to 59.1. That would compare to focusing a 114mm lens in the standard M6. I really don't know how the rangefinder works. I guess the difference is the redesign or my math is wrong. (Quote from brochure, "This opportunity has also been used to further optimize the general imaging properties of the viewfinder . . . . ") Art Art Searle, W2NRA, w2nra@erols.com, Lake Grove, Long Island, NY, USA 20 miles east of Nikon USA, 70 miles east of Leica USA