Eye Position/Parallax Effect (?) in M-series Viewfinders

I've been shooting an M6 classic with the 0.85 viewfinder this week and

noticed something yesterday that I've never noticed with either my M3 or with

any of the 0.72x viewfinder bodies. While focusing on a white object on a

black background ~25 yards away, after I thought I'd focused on the white

object, when I moved my eye slightly the two images in the rangefinder patch

moved apart. I think this is a parallax error...whether or not that's the

correct technical name, I'm curious about others' experiences with the 0.85x

finders because I've never noticed this with the 0.72x finders. Is this

something inherent in the finder system but less obvious with the lower

magnification? Is this effect only present in the 0.85x finders? Your

experiences and thoughts are appreciated.

That's something that happens w/all rangefinders & has to do w/your eye position & the design of the VF/RF, not w/parallax (which in the RF context refers to the difference between what you see in the VF & what the lens "sees"). For lack of a technical term, I call it RF patch wandering. In my experience, the Leica M cameras have the least amount of patch wandering (the Hexar RF, for example has more wandering) & I haven't noticed any variation w/the different magnfication VFs.

I concur with Chris. "Patch wandering" is a quaint descriptive term but quite accurate !!

Parallax is a most mis-understood term. It is a very small and easily compensated even if the VF is not self-correcting. In 35mm cameras it is usually less than two inches in dimension and all it takes is to tilt the camera the distance from the eyes to the tip of the nose of the subject. In situations where there is no human subject it is of consequence only if it is attempted to compose precisely to the format of the camera. Only a few SLR's are capable of such precision and with RF's adequate cropping space should be expected since the size of the image area will vary with the object distance.

John, what you describe is called rangefinder parallax & it is a very real phenomenon. It is different than viewfinder parallax, which results from the difference between the viewing positions of the viewfinder & the lens.

 

Rangefinder parallax occurs when the eye is not properly centered in relation to the viewfinder & the rangefinder patch, i.e. the rangefinder patch is being viewed from an angle. The design of the M3 viewfinder is different than that of all succeeding Leica M viewfinders, including that of the M6. Due to its design, the M3 rangefinder patch can not be viewed from an angle; you are forced to view it from a centered position. In contrast, the later rangefinder design does allow for viewing & focusing from an angle - with the potential for unfortunate results.

 

In regard to non-Leica viewfinders I'm surprised to read that the Hexar RF is more subject to this phenomenon than "Leica M cameras" because its rangefinder design is identical to that of all Leica M's except the M3. On the other hand, the rangefinder design of the Zeiss Ikon is more like that of the M3 & is therefore similarly immune to this problem

John, I have already checked carefully my M6TTL .85 for three times and this effect is very difficult to see. As soon as I move my eye, the patch turns opaque and I cannot see anything. I am looking at a very bright point over a black background: I need almost to imagine that the bright point moves when the reflection of the patch turns white. If it moves is negligible.

 

I checked also my Mamiyas, and there is a huge difference. The focusing pacth image turns double easily, even making difficult to focus in comparison with the Leica!

I have checked the Leica once again, and I have realized that I need to look from the corner of my eye to see a very little effect at the same time the focus patch gets milky. If I look without doing strange things with my eye, even moving the eye around the viewfinder that effect does`t appear at all.

Bill, thanks for clarifying the difference between RF parallax & VF parallax. I know the Hexar RF is supposed to have the same design as the post-M3 Leicas but I'm not sure that it is truly identical in construction. Perhaps Konica did something different, or it has something to do w/its relatively low magnification (though I never experienced the same amount of wandering w/my 0.58 M6), or perhaps it's just my Hexar that has the problem!

OK, this is helpful. Some replies but first two questions.

 

First, I have never noticed this with my current and/or previous M4, M5 or M6es (several). I've been using these things for 35 years. Did I just notice this, or is it worse with the higher magnification? To guess at answering my own question, logically it would seem that it would be easier to detect the effect at higher magnification so yes, the .85s would be "worse" than the .72s, which would in turn display the effect to a greater degree than the .58s (?).

 

Second, does the redesign of the MP view/rangefinder eliminate parallax? I am guessing it could not; I am guessing that it only solves the RF flare problem, and therefore (?) might make the parallax problem easier to experience because it would be less necessary to center the eye to avoid RF flareout?

 

Bill, you wrote: "Rangefinder parallax occurs when the eye is not properly centered in relation to the viewfinder & the rangefinder patch, i.e. the rangefinder patch is being viewed from an angle." That is precisely the phenomenon.

 

Jose, you wrote: "John, I have already checked carefully my M6TTL .85 for three times and this effect is very difficult to see. As soon as I move my eye, the patch turns opaque and I cannot see anything." Yes, that is true - there is only a small change from perfectly centered (no flare, no parallax effect) to very slightly off center (parallax but no flare-out) to a little more off center (at which point the RF patch flares out).

John, I wouldn't really call the rangefinder on the MP a "redesign" - more of a modification to the same basic design they've been using since the M2. The goal was to eliminate flare, not to correct rangefinder parallax. Since it is the same basic design, I wouldn't expect it to have any effect on RF parallax. I have no idea whether solving the flare problem will make the RF parallax problem easier to experience.

 

Bill

In my experience (I never be worried about rangefinders design) higher magnifications doesn`t need to show a greater effect. Furthermore, my highest mag camera ever has been my present .85 M6TTL Leica, and is the only camera I find almost impossible to reproduce this effect (I have used Mamiya 6, 7, Konica and a lot of older junks in several formats). The Mamiya 6 I use regularly has a 0.58 finder, and the parallax effect is clearly visible (I don`t know if its RF design is comparable to the Leicas).

 

Sorry I can`t answer your second question.

 

I find the flare problem really useful to focus in comparison with the Mamiya 6 RF. In some situations it is easy to be a little off centered with the Mamiya without notice (I don`t know if it would be wide enough to have a real off focus plane). With the Leicas, the flare problem makes me to get the eye perfectly centered, -when the patch gets milky you know you are getting off-. (I don`t say anything about the VF flare when the camera is against the light, perhaps the latest Leica VF improvements are related to this).

Thanks, all. Jose, I like the way you look at the world. :-)

 

"With the Leicas, the flare problem makes me to get the eye perfectly centered, -when the patch gets milky you know you are getting off-."

 

In other words, it isn't a defect, it's a feature. :-) ;-)

 

(Please be sure that I am not making fun of you at all!)