M6 (.85)TTL 35mm frame linesgreenspun.com : LUSENET : Leica Photography : One Thread |
How usable are the 35mm frame lines in an M6 (.85)TTL? Are they comparable to the 28mm frame lines on the .72 version?
-- Dennis Couvillion (couvilaw@aol.com), January 06, 2002
If you don't wear glasses when using your camera they are usable. Yes they are comparable to the 28mm frame lines on the .72 version.
-- sam smith (Ruy_Lopez@hotmail.com), January 06, 2002.
They are useable if you don't mind having to look around to the very edges of the finder. You can't just look straight through the finder and easily see the full 35 frame lines.
-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), January 06, 2002.
Absolute framing accuracy is not what I expect from a rangefinder anyway. I occassionally use 35mm with the .85x and actually enjoy the extra magnification. It is actually a benefit if you like to use the 35mm for portraits. True I can't see the corners that well but aren't most SLR prisms reflect 93% of the image anyway?
-- ray tai (razerx@netvigator.com), January 06, 2002.
Ray, Except for my Nikon F's which are 100%. I really love Leica cameras, but my most used lens would be the 35....and I wear eye glasses and REALLY need to see the entire 35 frameline! Is the .58 vewfinder the answer????
-- Todd Phillips (toddvphillips@webtv.net), January 07, 2002.
Todd, If you need to see the entire 35mm frameline then don't use the .85x. I also wear glass and can just see the 35mm framelines on the .72x.
-- ray tai (razerx@netvigator.com), January 07, 2002.
Don't get the 0.85x for your 35mm lens. If you can, try the 0.58x and the 0.72. The former works well with the wider lenses, even the 24mm if you want to go without the viewfinder. Of course, if you are going with one body and you think you might want to buy a 90mm lens someday, then go for the 0.72.
-- Chris Henry (henryjc@concentric.net), January 14, 2002.
Nice thing about the .58 finder is that the 35mm frame is by itself. It's pleasantly un-cluttered.
-- Jerry Lucas (anon@anomail.net), March 31, 2002.