I've been making trips to a Leica Dealer & trying out a M6TTL with a 35 f2 aspheric. My quandry comes from trying to decide which viewfinder is more optimal; the .58 or the .72 viewfinder.

Some background issues: I do wear eyeglasses. I want to stay with one M6 body. My second lens would probably be the 50f2.

I'm aware that a .72 viewfinder yields a greater focusing accuracy than the .58 viewfinder. However, I like having only one frameline when the 35 is on a .58 M6 & I like the extra space outside the .58/35f2 frameline relative to the .72/35f2 combo.

I'd like to hear from folks who went through a similar quandry & what they decided upon......& their results ;-)!

Tom D.

-- Thomas Donovan (75674.3465@compuserve.com), June 15, 2001

Answers

Tom D.

I wear glasses, too.

I've been using a Hexar RF (which has a .6 finder very like the .58 Leica) and have had little trouble with focusing accuracy for a 35 f/2 and 90 f/2.8 (some other issues with the Hexar, but not accuracy per se)...I think the .58 will focus anything successfully EXCEPT 50 f/1 & 75 f/1.4 (and even those on lucky occasion). The 135 3.4 and 90 f/2 may be right at the edge of its capabilities.

The real drawback (if any) to the low mag finders is that I find it hard to visualize the final picture with anything longer than a 75...the little frames are too small and too incomplete.

AT the other end, the eye relief for the 35 and 28 frames is wonderful with the .58. Some people do feel that the .58 finder "pushes" them too far away from the action, But I 'see' pictures better (and get better pictures) when using the 35mm on the Hexar (on average) because it is easier to 'gestalt' the whole image and composition at once, instead of peering around inside the .72's very wide 35 frame.

If I were you I'd consider the third lens after the 50...will it be a 28 or a 90? If a 90, maybe go for the .72...if a 28, go for the .58.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), June 15, 2001.

Tom,

IMHO, the .72 finder is the one for you. The 35mm frame line is just right if you wear glasses, and you won't even notice the other one after a while.

Someday, someway, you will have the desire to try the 90, and I think you will be happy you chose the .72!

Good luck!

-- Steve Hoffman (shoffman2@socal.rr.com), June 15, 2001.

Tom ! I went through this and at last I didn't know what to do. So I had to make a final decision. I wasn't that adventurous so I wind up with a 0.72. I think this is in between if you have further plans to use a 90 mm and cannot afford an extra body (who can?). One drawback is that if you later on go for a short one (24 mm) you need an extra viewfinder. I think that with a .58 you can use the 24 mm without the viewfinder despite the lack of a 24 mm frame line. With a .72 you will need that extra viewfinder. You see, all those options makes you crazy. The world is not the same. But in the final end you will be happy. Nowdays three months later I am happy with my 0.72 and 24 (+viewfinder), 50 and 90. /Lars

-- Lars Kristensen (krislars@algonet.se), June 15, 2001.

I use the 35/2 pre aspherical almost exlusivley, I own a 50mm lens but use it 1% of the time. I generally take pictures of people I know and am with and the 35 is perfect for this. I use a .72 cos when I bought it there was no choice.. I have looked through a .58 and since I personally would not use a longer lense than a 50, it would probalbly have been my logical choice. However I love the view of the 35 frame in the 0.72 and do not have any trouble with framing, it seems completely natural. My advice is if you will want to get a 75 or 90 0.72, if 50 is your longest 0.58. Good luck

-- Richard Palmer (richard@designblue.co.uk), June 15, 2001.

There is no right answer only what YOU prefer. As you state you like the 0.58x.....

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@powersurfr.com), June 15, 2001.

I use a 50mm with the 0.58 finder and have no problems focusing (I feel that the effective baseline/focusing accuracy reasoning is a little overstated generally). I like the area outside the finder for better composition/anticipation. You state the next lens after the 35 would be the 50. I think the 0.58 is the better choice. It is better for 35mm because the whole frame is easier to see while wearing eyeglasses, and, there are no other frame lines (sans 135mm lines) to obstruct the view (since the 35mm focal length is so important to Leica photography, this makes the 0.58 the essentail body for eyeglasses wearers, and the 0.72 for the non-glasses wearer). Finally, if you ever get a 28, or the Tri-Elmar, the 0.58 would be much better. And, really finally, when you get a second body (:-) you can get the 0.85 for your 90 and 135 lenses (although, the90mm frame lines on the 0.58 look perfectly serviceable to me.

Good luck with your choice.

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), June 15, 2001.

Tom:

IMO, it really does not matter. I own both a .58 and .72 body, and lenses from 15mm to 90mm; and If was going shooting with just the 35 and 50, I'd grab whichever body had film in it! In other words, either will work fine. If you go with whichever "feels" best to you now with the 35, you'll be happy in the long-run. The big difference is with the 28, where even though I don't wear glasses, the 28 framelines are tight in the .72 body. But that being said, I find the 90 is more comfortable on the .72 body.

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), June 15, 2001.

I'm a huge fan of the .58 finder. My usual lenses are the 28, 35 and 50 (or the 3E), and I find the .58 to be perfect for those lenses. In fact, I think the .58 finder is the best one since the M2 for use with 35mm lenses, due to the lack of the 135 frame. I wear glasses, and I love the fact that I can see the entire 35mm frame with zero effort.

For the 75, 90 and 135 the .85 is a more effective (and much more expensive) solution. However, if I'm shooting something that will require 35/50/90 and a single body, I always take the .72 - it's still the generalist of the trio.

So, if you will not be using a 28 and may in future get a 90, I'd say get the .72. If you may get a 28 but will stop at 50 on the long side, I'd recommend the .58.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul_chefurka@pmc-sierra.com), June 15, 2001.

Folks,

The rangefinder experience sure comes through;-)! I'm going to mull this over a bit more; however, it looks like I'll order a M6TTL/.58 with my 35 f2 Aspheric.

Thanks for the great responses!

Tom D.

-- Thomas Donovan (75674.3465@compuserve.com), June 15, 2001.

I own both 0.58 and 0.85 and lenses 35/50/90. I enjoy both very much, but if I had to pick just one, it would be the 0.58 I just like being able to see a larger portion of the "out of frame" image and the lenses I use 99% of the time are the 35 and 50. People don't even know they are being watched. BTW the 90 IS better on the 0.85

Don

-- Don M (maldos@home.com), June 15, 2001.

Thomas,

Your reasons for wanting the 0.58 finder were well reasoned and clear. I don't believe I've read anything that would contra-indicate your preference. The remarks about the 90 were valid points, only you didn't say anything about wanting one. If you do later, you could pick up an f/4. I wear eyeglasses and contacts at various times, and find the 0.72 useable, even with 28mm, but I can easily see the advantage of the 0.58 finder.

Trust your judgment!

Best wishes,

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), June 15, 2001.

Continuing the dialogue;

It's clear,per the discussions, that my second body should be a M6/.85 for my third lens....the apo 90. Cash flow is a primary issue; and requires pruning my SLR system. This will take awhile!

Pruning your SLR gear is being discussed in another thread which I'm following with avid interest;-)!

Having a single frameline & higher magnification with the m6/.85 & the 90 combo would be quite nice.

Thanks again for all the ideas. BTW, I ordered my M6/.58 & 35 f2 aspheric today ;-)! There'll soon be joy in Mudville;-)!

Tom D.

-- Thomas Donovan (75674.4365@compuserve.com), June 15, 2001.

Tom:

I wear glasses and have a very difficult time seeing the entire 35mm framelines in the 0.72 M6 TTL. I bought the camera last year. The 0.58 M6 TTL body had not been introduced then. Since I use the 35mm/f2 ASPH lens most of the time, I am seriously looking at the 0.58 body now! Oh well! Live and learn!.........................

-- Muhammad Chishty (applemac97@aol.com), June 16, 2001.

I bought my M6TTL .72x before the .58x was available. Lucky me, the 35/ 50/90 framelines suit my vision extremely well and allow me sufficient focusing and framing accuracy. I tried a .58x body recently and didn't like the lower magnification, although I'd go for it if I were going to use a 28mm lens much. I use the 35 and 24 lenses the most, however, so the .72x works very well.

Godfrey

-- Godfrey DiGiorgi (ramarren@bayarea.net), June 16, 2001.

Hi

I bought an second hand M6 a few weeks ago to add to my Hexar RF. I have the Hexar 50mm and a Voigtlander 35mm. I prefer the 35 on the RF which is a 0.6 and I prefer the 50 on the M6.

I wear glasses and like seeing some area around the frame but also the eye relief on the M6 means I only really concentrate on the middle of view area.

I have also tried a Konica 90mm - I find it difficult to focus on the Hexar but much easier on the M6, as I am quite new to this it may well be my lack of practice than the camera.

Tapas

-- Tapas Maiti (tapasmaiti@aol.com), June 16, 2001.