M rangefinder masks-customization.

I'm curious about the masks in the M2/4/5/6/7/mp/etc rangefinder and also the masks in

the M3. What are the made of? I know it borders on the rediculous custom Leica fantasy,

but I'm just curious about how difficult it would be to create a new mask to a custom size

in order to accomade a non standard focal length lens, or for other reasons. Perhaps a

near and an infinity frameline for the same lens.

You find the details on Erwin Put site. Open up the rangefinder engineering page. Here is the site http://www.imx.nl.html

All sorts of technical and lens data can be found here.

Customizing the mask would be quite possible if someone wanted to set up a little cottage industry making masks in custom configurations, and installing them.

A reasonable mask for the .58 finder system would be: 28/90; 35; and 50 (leaving off the 75mm frame). The 50mm frame should be full size.

At present, the 50mm frame is so undersized that when I go out planning to shoot with a 50, I take my M2 or M3. The M6, MP, and M7, with their undersized 50 frames, stay home. If other lenses are more important, then one of the more modern cameras can go along.

I am sure it was the introduction of the metering diodes that resulted in the downsized 50 frameline.

Rob, are you really sure about that? I used to own both an M4 and an M4-P, and it's my recollection that the frame for the 50 was smaller in the M4-P. Both cameras, of course, lack metering diodes.

It's my understanding that the 50 frame was downsized to be accurate for the 50 at a minimum focusing distance of .7m, rather than 1m, as was true for the earlier generation of lenses.

Whatever the reason for the reduction in size, I share your dissatisfaction. The only Leica I now own is an MP, and I'm seriously thinking about an auxiliary viewfinder for use with the 50.

Even the older frame lines understated the area covered by the lens at common shooting distances, but the situation with the current frame lines is a true hindrance to the type of street shooting that the camera is designed for.

I sold my M6ttl because of the 50mm frameline-not to mention the one day battery life. I

much prefer the M4-2 and earlier 50 brightline, and the one in the M3 of course. But I

really like the idea of a body dedicated to one or two lenses with framelines for near and

for infinity. Mine would have them for a 40mm.

"I sold my M6ttl because of the 50mm frameline-not to mention the one day battery life."

One day battery life? I have two TTL's and the batteries last for months and months. They

WILL wear down in a day if you leave the camera cocked in the bag and anything presses on

the shutter, though.

You are of course correct, but I like to leave my cameras cocked and ready. My M6ttl was a

very early one and I believe these bodies are perhaps a little worse than the later ones

when it comes to battery life, so they say.

I own two M6 TTL's, one with the 0.58 finder and one with the 0.85. Because I don't have a

75mm I asked Don Goldberg to remove these frames on both camera's (together with the

flare-free optics installment and a black leica-logo on the 0.58 to keep them apart). He

did it and the result is much better now. The 0.58 has now frames for 35, 50 and a 28/90

combo while the 0.85 has frames for a 35/135 combo, 50 and 90. Especially the stand-

alone frames are wonderful to work with. The finder looks so much cleaner. I'm not sure

what he did with the frames. It looks like he just blanked out the 75, because the 50mm

frames are different in the two camera's. The 0.58 has a four sided full frame while the

0.85 has one with the bottom line open in the middle, just like it was before the

modification. Today I looked through a M2 finder and it looked perfect! I think it would be

great if those frames could be installed in a 0.72 M6. Not sure if it can be done though.