Re: [Leica] Re: M6 Viewfinder

[Javier Perez <japho@cunyvm.cuny.edu>]

I agree.
Folks seem to get stuck on the M3. Their reasons usually center around issues
of
solidness, smoothness and focusing accuracy. I think the toughness part
started way back when some neurotics objected to the plastic pivoting tip
on the M4 advance. As for accuracy, sure, the specs speak for themselves. The
M3
has a larger effective base, but the M4 and later models have enough base to
focus a 135 elmarit with googles
and an elmar without, both at full aperture. As for the smoothness, this has
less to do
with the frictional arguments of steel motor capable gears VS old brass gears
than it does
with the careful centering of the 33 gear idler and just enough play and good
alignment on the
main advance assy. In fact any M can be made as smooth as an M3 in my opinion.

Of course I adore the M3, who wouldn't, And I'll readily admit that it's
slightly better assembled that the early m6s
The curtains on my early m6 aint quite parellel!
But if stuck on a desert island I'de rather be stuck with an M6. (in addition
to the supermodel)

BTW: I'm also a fanatical defender of the M4-2

See Ya
Javier



Jim Brick wrote:

> I personally think the M6 has a lot to offer over the older M3 cameras.
> Easy load, meter, rapid rewind, rapidwinder availability, very easy to see
> 35mm frame lines. I'm not putting down the M3, I just happen to like the
> niceties of the M6. That's why I bought another Classic M6. I'm not aware
> of a frameline accuracy problem.
>
> Jim
>
> At 08:20 PM 6/4/99 -0500, you wrote:
> >I have a M3 with 50mm and 35m RF summicron - so I've only used the 50mm
> >bright frame in the M3 with the two lenses. I (must) wear glasses and I
> >have to "look around" in the finder to see the edges of the bright
> >frame.
> >
> >I've been thinking about getting a M6 Classic and 35mm f2 ASPH. I'm just
> >not happy with the f2 performance of the 35mm summicron and the loss of
> >view finder contrast with the goggles. My equipment is in excellent user
> >condition, everything just CLA'd by Leitz, NJ. But still thinking the
> >smaller 35mm frame would be easier on my "aging" eyes.
> >
> >I've only had very limited access to M6 and at first I thought the 35mm
> >frame was quite usable. Lately, I've heard some grumblings on the
> >usability of the 35mm frame in the M6 Classic. Some of these comments
> >indicate that the image coverage by the 35mm frame is not very accurate.
> >
> >I think I could be completely happy with a 35mm and 50mm lens. I would
> >consider a 24mm as a third but I like working close.
> >
> >Any comments and wisdom from the luggers on the useability and accuracy
> >of the 35mm frame in the M6 and wisdom of abandoning my current
> >equipment.
> >
> >Thanks and Regards,
> >
> >Roger