Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/04/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Paul, The situation with your lens is not completely clear but I will answer it as comprehensively as I can. From what you write I suspect that you have an M3 version of the lens which has had the 'eyes' taken off, if this is the case, (and you can check this by finding some mounting holes for the 'eyes) then you are right to think that you do need the eyes on to achieve proper focussing. The lens was made in 3 versions. In 1954 for the M3 w/out the eyes, keying the widest frame then available, 50mm. In 1956 for the M3, with the eyes, still keying the 50mm frame but optically widening it to show 35mm area. In 1958 for the M2 (and therfore the M4, M5 and M6) keying in the 35mm frame. If you bought the lens without the eyes and it is obviously designed for them (look for the screw holes) then the lens is pretty worthless and you need to take it back if possible. If you have the eyes, put them back on. The upshot is that the lens will work well with the M6 providing the eyes are on, you will notice a very wide field of view (equivalent to 20mm or so) and therefore the 35mm frame will seem small within that, but trust me, it is correct. Naturally if you see no mounting holes for the eyes then the lens is either the 1st or 3rd version and should work fine, (although the 1st version will only key the 50mm frame) if your lens is one of these then a good repairer should be able to sort things out. The focussing cams of the 1st and 3rd type lenses are different to the 2nd and are not interchangeable. The only distance at which your present lens will focus accuartely is at infinity. best regards, Jem =============================== P2CON@aol.com wrote: > Hi Folks, just tuned in recently so I don't know my way around yet. If you > have an archive bursting with info I haven't found it yet, so, thanking you > in advance, here is my question: Does the Summaron f/3.5cm 1:3.5 require the > "eyes" in order to focus properly on a M6 body? I have the lens (without the > eyes) and the M6 body, but the rangefinder indication of proper focus is not > even close to the distance indication on the lens barrel. Is this telling me > I need the "eyes", or is it an indication of a problem? > Thanks, Paul Connet