Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The area metered by the MR-4 is the same as the coverage of a 90mm lens but the M6 meter, of course, varies with the lens mounted. If you use 50mm or wider lenses, I am sure the MR-4 meters a smaller area, but with a longer lens, the MR-4 becomes less useful. The magnification of the Hexar is 0.58x and the base is the same as all the M cameras. > From: Krechtz@aol.com > ........Also, despite opinion to the contrary, I have found the limited > area readings obtained with my old MR meters both accurate and consistent. > The area read by the M6 seems a bit larger. > Generally the lighting in such venues tends to remain constant, so taking a > few readings here and there and keeping them in mind generally works well. > The practice of separately metering each shot seems to have been engendered > by the ready ability to do so, created by TTL technology. The need almost > seems to have been spawned by the technology, rather than vice-versa. > Another issue related to use of the Hexar for available light is the limited > effective RF base, compared to the optimal M3. I should look this up, but I > believe the magnification is only .6, and the base itself is substantially > shorter. Not ideal for focusing the Noctilux or 75 Summilux. > > Joe Sobel