Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Brother Kurt put it better than I ever could. Just go out and take pictures! Thank you, Kurt. Buzz - -----Original Message----- From: khmiska [mailto:khmiska@umich.edu] Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 8:46 AM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] My new M3 Buzz, Your comments hit the nail on the head. I bought my M2 in March. I put film into it many times since then. I don't coddle it. I enjoy it every time I pick it up. I live with whatever shortcomings it might have but I don't think it has any. Wouldn't mind a 135 frame but then I have a finder for that. BTW - I do the same with my Rollei TLR. Kurt Ann Arbor Buzz Hausner wrote: > Did you buy the bloody thing just so you could complain about it on the LUG? > I suggest that you do one of two things; a) just get it cleaned, lubed, and > adjusted by a competent repair person, or b) trade it "up" for a Hexar. > Whinging and asking LUG members to diagnose your problems by remote sensing > is not what I for one consider useful endeavors, though others may disagree > and I apologize to all of them now. > > Buzz Hausner > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dante A Stella [mailto:dante@umich.edu] > Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 7:10 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: [Leica] My new M3 > > Joe: > > I will check it out with a flashlight (now where do I keep that?!). Gear > trains > and 1/15 sound fine. Times to 1 sec on my mechanical watch (with 1/5 second > ticks), so I don't think the shutter is out of whack. It could just be that > I > was looking at it in a room with bad light. The testing will continue. > What I > had to compare it to on the modern end (Hexar RF) has the benefits of > multicoating and a totally different RF design, so we'll see. If it looks > iffy > I'll have it checked locally and then call DAG. > > Why don't Canons accumulate crud? I haven't seen a bad one yet. Is the > high > ozone content of the air here going to cause problems? > > Cheers > Dante > > Krechtz@aol.com wrote: > > > In a message dated 9/18/00 1:37:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > dante@umich.edu > > writes: > > > > << (1) What is the story with the RF brightness? I didn't see any fog or > > separation on mine and compared it to about ten M2s. Nothing really > > notable in differences, but even compared to a Hexar RF, well... let's > > just say that the 0.91 finder on the M3 seems to be more than overcome > > by its old-school brightness. (snip)>> > > > > The color tends to be on the cool, or blue side, compared to an M6. I > have > > also read that the M6 is brighter due to removal of a condenser from the > > light path, which has the unwanted side-effect of fostering that "flare" > we > > know and love. > > You cannot really see fog or dirt in the finder properly unless you face > the > > camera and look into the finder from about 12-18" away while shining a > small > > flashlight through the eyepiece. Unless a finder and/or mirror has been > > cleaned recently, it is likely to exhibit some dimming due to > accumulations > > of crud.. To me, this tends to explain why most of the 40-or-so-year old > > finders you saw looked similar. > > > > (snip) > > > > <<(3) Are some M3s quieter than others? This one is a SS PV (927xxx) > and > > it is far more quiet than any M I have encountered. Does it have > > anything to do with the shutter brake someone was talking about > earlier?>> > > > > >From what I am told, the double brake was found only on the DS, possibly > only > > the earlier units at that. Your M3's behavior is, IMHO, more likely to be > > the result of a combination of old thickened lubricant and dirt, a very > > effective accoustical damper. You didn't mention what the slow speed gear > > train sounded like. Check it out on a shutter tester. > > > > << (4) What was the trick for allowing the RF to work at 0,7m?>> > > > > First, mount a lens that focuses to 0.7 m...? > > > > << Well, it will be an interesting experience. The M3 is a much different > > beast from the M6 (and sufficiently different from the Hexar RF), and > > over the next couple of weeks it will be interesting to see how much > > more difficult it is to use the M3-type loading and rewind.>> > > > > You got that right! I think you will also find that advancing the film > takes > > a bit more effort than with the Hexar, and the TTL metering is not very > > reliable. > > > > << I am most interested in finding out whether or not the finder really > > improves the > > long/fast lens experience, especially as against a Canon 7, which has a > > 0.85x magnification and a lot clearer finder. I hope it does - it's a > > nice camera.>> > > > > IME, the M3 has a better finder, even if one considers only the square RF > > patch. If your 7 seems to have a markedly clearer finder, I suspect that > it > > is either much cleaner or in better condition, hopefully and probably the > > former. > > > > <<Any tips or tricks would be appreciated.>> > > > > Don't mention it! Good luck. Your M3 sounds like a good candidate for a > > CLA, so don't be too critical of its performance before getting it checked > > out. > > > > Joe Sobel > > > > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Dante Stella > http://www-personal.umich.edu/~dante