M4P with M3 finder...basic rangefinder questions I think...

I've been studying the whole M line in order to figure out which is best for me, (I want to shoot with ONLY a 75mm lens--probably the Voightlander to start--and from what I can tell, I want the M4-P for the 75mm framelines, but with the M3's 'higher-magnification' finder...which is my question, I guess: can I do that..change the M4-P's finder to the M3's and still have the 75mm framelines). Some some of the things I keep coming across are the following (from cameraquest) and I don't really understand the basics of finders/baselines/magnification/etc...the 'rangerfinder' part of rangefinders:

 

<p>

 

>>"M3: Much longer and therefore more accurate rangefinder

 

<p>

 

>>"If you like to shoot the 50/1 Noctilux or the 75/1.4 Summilux, M3's focus them more accurately than any other M with the longest effective rangefinder base length and focusing accuracy in the M series. M3's can focus 25% MORE ACCURATELY than the M4/M5/M4-2/M4-P and M6 due to longer effective baselength rangefinder

 

<p>

 

>>"M4-P: The M4-P [adds] a six position finder for 28/35/50/75/90/135 lenses.

 

<p>

 

As I say, I want to shoot with a 75mm as my standard and only lens. Somewhere on the cameraquest site, I've read that you can change the finders between M cameras.

 

<p>

 

I don't want to use an auxilliary attachment to see the 75mm focal length (it seems a real pain...especially for my only lens), and so what I want is the best 75mm set-up I can get on a non-collecor (read: affordable) M camera.

 

<p>

 

Am I thinking correctly? M4-P + M3 finder? or am I not quite understanding how this all works yet?

 

<p>

 

Thanks sincerely, shawn

Shawn

 

<p>

 

The only official changes I know of is that the original M4 and M4-2

can be updated by Leica to have the M4P/M6 frames. I do not think you

can convert the M4P to be equivalent to the M3 - or I am not sure it

would be easy. Someone might be able to black out your 50mm

framelines so that all you saw was the 75mm, which would seem more

straightforward. Not that this would help with the focussing accuracy

issue.

 

<p>

 

What you really want perhaps is someone to add the 75mm framelines to

an M3. Or you could get a .85 M6 to get near-M3 accuracy.

I can see no merit in a 75mm NON Leica lens of very ordinary aperture,f2.5 being made as main lens.I think you would be better with a 50mm Summicron and slight crop.I frame with 90mm frame for portraits BUT use the 50mmm !I have a much sharper lens,wide aperture if needed and a wider angle than 75/90,if used normally.You can add M6 frames to M2/4 NOT the M3.Again we see the "slr idea" of fitting any lens to a Leica RNGFDR.One of the best photographs I`ve ever taken was using this method at a political demonstration.The 75mm Summilux is a special lens offering TWO more apertures than the V-lens.....

Thanks so far. Jason, I understand the non-Leica lens issue (why buy

a Leica, right?); but I want to shoot the 75 f1.4, don't worry. I am

going to get the Voightlander til I can afford the Leica (a

tremendous difference in price, and no doubt, performance), that's

all.

 

<p>

 

It sounds, so far, like the best answer is to have 75mm frame put

into an M3?

If you have enough money, you can do anything, however, as you

are starting with the Cosina/Voigtlander lens because of budget

constraints, this indicates that it is unlikely you can afford very

much custom work. I have friends with a M3 finder in a M6,

retaining full meter function, M4-2s with M3 finders and M4s with

the 0.85x finder. To install an M3 finder in a later camera is

expensive as you need a donor camera with a good finder and

the body will require a significant amount of precision

machining. Also to put a 75mm frame in a M3 would be very

expensive as well as it would have to be custom made. After all

this bad news, here is what I would recommend. Buy a M4-P and

the Cosina lens, then use them until you can afford the 75/1.4.

After that you can have the M4-P finder replaced, completely, with

a 0.85x finder if you feel that is necessary. The standard 0.72x

finder is fine for focusing the 75/1.4. The cost of changing finders

is about $700US to $900US.

>>Buy a M4-P and the Cosina lens, then use them until you can afford

the 75/1.4. After that you can have the M4-P finder replaced,

completely, with a 0.85x finder if you feel that is necessary

 

<p>

 

Thanks John. This is pretty much what I've been thinking as for

'price/purchasing' ability. Not many people think like I do in

regards to buying (piecemeal/moving up slowly). Thanks for the

probably-unintentional vote of confidence.

 

<p>

 

As for the .85, I guess this is theoretical meanering on my part, and

you are probably right, I may do fine without it.

 

<p>

 

I am probably going to forego the Toronto scene (from what I've seen

and heard, it's not that great for Leica), since I have to get

Voightlander through the US anyways, and I'll keep my eyes open on

EBay for a M4-P.

 

<p>

 

Thanks a lot for all your help.

Shawn,

 

<p>

 

I am not saying that the M3 can't be modified, but every book that I

have on Leica Ms states just the opposite. They say any M series

camera EXCEPT the M3 can be modified to the M4P / M6 finder. The M2

has a bit of a higher magnification in its original form, but the

housing will accept the modification.

 

<p>

 

Essentially, the frame is simply etched onto a screen that projects

an illuminated line into the viewfinder path... for the lens

attached. In theory, (and that is a big "in theory"), 75mm frame

lines could be added, but it would be a scary proposition to possibly

ruin a great camera. I couldn't imagine being drunk enough to even

think of attempting to have this surgery performed. It would be a

total freelance type of thing... Lieca won't do it.

 

<p>

 

If you are married to the 75mm lens as you primary lens, I would get

a new .85 M6. The M3 has a .91 magnification... in the real world,

you would not suffer much focusing in accuracy. Tony uses his f1

Noctilux on a classic M6, and his shots look great wide open.

 

<p>

 

I do agree that the use of the Voigtlander 75mm lens is acceptable

until you can save up for the Summilux. They are different, but not

so much that the Voigtlander is poor... it is just that the Leica is

so good. Many hardcore Leica users in the LUG have embraced the

Voigtlander... and are admonishing Lieca to bring out a mid level

lens of a similar spec.

 

<p>

 

This might be too techno' to read through, but I am attaching a web

site in which Leica Guru, Erwin Puts has investigated the accuracy of

rangefinders... including the new .58, and shows the maximum

allowable f-stop for specific focal lengths. In a few words, any

leica camera can focus the 75 f1.4 accurately... now the frame may be

too small on some models, but they will focus no problem.

 

<p>

 

http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/technics/rfaccuracy.html

Thanks Al.

 

<p>

 

I printed that page off. Your comments were very helpful, especially

"In a few words, any leica camera can focus the 75 f1.4 accurately...

now the frame may be too small on some models, but they will focus no

problem".

 

<p>

 

...I guess what you're saying is, the focus is physically accurate,

but just occuring over such a small region of the frame to make it

difficult for the human eye to 'see' if it is or isn't truly in focus.

 

<p>

 

I agree that the 'perfect' camera is probably the M6, with the

framelines for 75mm, and the .85 magnification (I don't yet

understand how the lens's aperture determines anything on a

rangefinder, except maybe, after what you've said, for giving a

brighter--and therefore more easily seen--image in the viewfinder.

 

<p>

 

However That would mean I have to wait until December before I can

buy. I don't know 'bout that!!!

Shawn

 

<p>

 

What Al means is that the frame for the 75mm is small in the

viewfinder. The wideangles subtend a larger angle so are larger. It

has no affect on the rangefinder spot size, but a smaller frame size

makes it harder to visualize the final result. Kind of like seeing

the shot through the wrong end of telescope versus on a movie screen.

 

<p>

 

Look through any M and you will understand.

Yah, that's kinda what I was **trying** to say. Pardon my words. I

know the rangefinder image is constant, and that the 75mm line will

be quite small, especially on a finder that goes from 28-135; not

actually having looked through an M4-P (only an M4 and various fixed-

lens RFs), I imagine the 75 will take up fairly less than half the

viewfinder? ...So trying to line up verticals/horizontals in that

small area is **probably** going to be like using the 'rangefinder'

on a nikon SLR...that little useless split-circle...?

Shawn,

 

<p>

 

As far as the importance of the f-stop regarding the focusing

ability / accuracy... It is related to the lens' depth of field.

Take for example the 50mm lenses for the M Leica. There is a f2.8

and an f1.0. The combination of the viewfinder magnification and the

rangefinder base determines the accuracy... However, you can be a bit

sloppy when focusing the f2.8 lens, but you need to be absolutely

critical for the f1.0. In other word, the extended depth of field of

the slower lens will allow some deviation before the lens is

considered "out of focus".

 

<p>

 

The opposite is true as you start getting into wide angle lenses. An

SLR is harder to focus a 21mm lens than when using the rangefinder,

because the extreme DOF of the wide-angle makes it harder for you eye

to determine IN FOCUS / OUT OF FOCUS... it is a judgment, but the RF

camera takes none of that in consideration. The 21 and the 90 focus

with the same ease. Even using that split image in the SLR is sort

of a rangefinder... but with a tiny base. I've seen an in-writing

test saying that for a 50mm lens, the RF is 6 times more accurate

than the SLR. Since none of us have a problem focusing an SLR with a

fifty, you can imagine the rangefinder is pretty good... good enough

for an f1.0 lens.

Depending upon what you using the 75 Summilux for, you may consider

use the Voightlander 75mm viewfinder on a M3. It is, of course, not

an ideal combination but may help for both focus and frame accuracy.

I have been using the combination of M5 (with 75 frame line added) and

75 Summilux and I am very satisfied with it. The majority of shoots

with 75 Summilux are open f-stops. I don't really feel 0.72 finder

compromises the focus accuracy for using 75 Summilux wide open.

 

<p>

 

BTW, putting 75mm frame line in the M3 is not very practical at all.

Not many experienced Leica repair specialists would want to do it even

if cost is an objective.

 

<p>

 

Cing-Dao Kan

"; not actually having looked through an M4-P" Shawn, I'm going to

offer a bit of advise that may save you a lot of trouble that I went

through. Go to a used camera show or find a nearby large store that

carries a good selection of used Leica cameras, and get your hands on

a some of this stuff in person. Put a 75mm lens on the camera and see

if that is really what you want to hang on your neck. I made the

mistake of reading all kinds of stuff at Cameraquest and other sites,

and figured out theoretically the perfect camera for me. I bought an

M6HM TTL with 35mm aspherical Summicron for a huge chunk of change

mail order without ever even holding one in my hands (I am an M3

shooter). When the camera arrived, to my surprise, I hated it. I

hated the finder with all the lines in my face. The range finder

patch was whiteing out on me. I didn't like the cheesy winding feel

(compared to the M3), I couldn't hardly see the 35mm lines, etc.

Don't get me wrong, for what it is ,the M6 HM TTL is an exceptional

camera, but in my mind, I had convinced myself without ever seeing

one it was going to be an M3 with a built in meter. IT ISN"T!

Luckily I sold the stuff on e-bay for about what I paid for it, but

it taught me to get my hands on the stuff I'm interested in instead

of spending too much time reading and talking about it.

Andrew I took your advice and went all over the place last night,

'feeling' Liecas. I could not find an M4-P, but I played with an M6

.72, an M4 'Midland" (or something like that); an M3 (very briefly),

and a CL.

 

<p>

 

I found all the Ms to be very similar in 'body feel' to my old F3.

They were awkward. But the viewfinder in the M6 was marvelous. I

could live with the 75mm framelines on that, no problem. But I also,

as I say, tried the CL. It was a beater, something I would never buy.

And I've heard things which 'in theory' should leave me put off of

them compared to a true M, or even a Voightlander for that matter.

 

<p>

 

But I loved the feel of the CL. It felt...made for me. This worries

me. I keep seeing myself buying this camera on EBay and trying to put

the Vgtldr. Color Heliar on it. And staying stopped down and using

small Metz on it when necessary, shooting at 3200EI otherwise in low

light.

 

<p>

 

Does that sound feasible?

 

<p>

 

Also, do Leica Ms grow on you, or do you love them or hate them from

the get go?

ps the 'Voigtlander double accessory shoe', apparently, 'has no hot

shoe'. Does this mean I can't put the 75mm finder and a flash on a CL

at the same time (or any other camera for that matter)?

 

<p>

 

Sorry for all these q's in one post, but I don't wanna clog up the

dbase with too much info during these primative times...:-)

Shawn

 

<p>

 

Double accessory shoe - you are correct. It is really designed for

their meter + a viewfinder.

 

<p>

 

The CL has a nice viewfinder and it is a great little camera. But, it

is also not really an M in terms of construction (much more

lightweight). But it does have a Leica-quality viewfinder and of

course takes M lenses. I use it with the 40mm Rokkor and a 90 modern

Elmarit it makes a wonderful travel camera. The meter is a bit

erratic there is no doubt about that, but does work OK - but there

again you have to make sure you get one that does - many of the s/h

ones need servicing.

Thanks Robin.

 

<p>

 

Something I've been unable to figure out (and never checked at the

store...duh): can I shoot the CL in full manual? I don't HAVE to use

the meter, right?

Absolutely. It has nothing automatic about it.

Shawn,

 

<p>

 

PLEASE READ!!! I hope that my previous answer was not misleading.

When I told you that "any Leica can accurately focus the 75mm

f1.4"... I meant any Leica M series camera. While the CL has an M

mount, it is generally not included in the series. The fastest /

longest lens offered for either the CL or the Minolta derivative CLE

was a 90mm f4.0. Some users are comfortable with the 90mm f2.8, but

I can't even imagine the 75mm f1.4 focusing while wide open at

moderately close distances. One of the trade offs for the smaller

body is the reduction of the rangefinder base. Remember, there are

two parts to RF accuracy, the magnification and the base... reduce

either one (or both) and the accuracy goes down. This is not a

problem for the normal range of lenses, but the 75mm Summilux is not

normal.

 

<p>

 

If you are truly locked in to using this lens.... You need to get a

true M camera. I read your responses in this and the "CAMERA

EQUIPMENT" thread and it seems like you are serious about the CL.

Please understand the limitations regarding the 75mm lens.

 

<p>

 

Sorry for any problems due to my post about rangefinders.

Thanks Al. I am starting to understand, slowly, the virtues and

limitations here. I realize (sort of...) that a CL is not going to

work practically AT ALL with a 75mm 1.4 wide-open. But I can't buy

that lens yet anyways...one just sold on eBay for approx. $2000US,

which is simply out of my budget right now. So, I'm going to get the

Vgtlndr 2.5 to start. And from the cameraquest site, it says anything

from a 50mm f2 to a 90mm f4 should work fine. The 75mm f2.5 seems to

fall nicely between those two extremes, so I should be alright until

I can afford the Leica glass.

 

<p>

 

As for the CL, I loved the feel of it. The Ms, all of them, reminded

me of my F3 in 'feel'. I'm not saying I won't buy an M. I was just

saying how nicely the CLs fit. But overall, I did not in the least

find them 'unruly'. I'm gonna play around a bit more with both the Ms

and the CL.

 

<p>

 

.85-.91 (the M3s .91, right?) seems the best mag. for a 75mm lens. As

for a separate 75mm finder, I emailed Stephen Gandy, and he thinks I

should just envision witha 90, and wing it. That would open up the

shoe for a small Metz as well.

 

<p>

 

See, Al, I'm really not convinced of anything yet. The CL felt really

nice, but that is only part of the concern for me. I still wanna look.

Shawn

 

<p>

 

At the risk of stating the obvious - have you looked at the Bessa-R.

That has a 75mm frame and will work superbly with the v75mm. Of

course it is no good for the Summilux, but the R is much cheaper.

Somehow unless you are really good at visualising a 75mm frame using

the existing 40/50 and 90 frames I think using a CL with a separate

75mm finder might well be a pain. I have a 135 Elmar which I use

occasionally with the CL and a separate 135 viewfinder. I like it

actually, but it is no good at all for action shots or when you need

to be quick.

Ya, I've thought about that one, too. Cheap, that's for sure, bright

from what I've heard, no need for bayonet adaptor with their Color

Heliar. Framelines for 75mm. Maybe I'm just being stubborn, but to

buy a non-Leica lens, and a non-Leica body--I have no qualms

purchasing the Voightlander lens since it will get me started, but I

just know that if I were to buy a Bessa/Hexar I would end up getting

antsy. OK a snob lurks within, even if he isn't the richest of

snobs...But who knows, maybe sanity will kick in sometime!!!

ps It kind of bothers me that I didn't naturally gravitate to the

Ms...and that the CL felt so right to me...I am very small

framed/small-handed, and maybe that accounts for it, who

knows...another reason I am leary of buying the Bessa from the States

(they're not sold in Canada...).

Shawn,

 

<p>

 

The purchase of an M series Leica is never a casual thing... unless

you have way too much money. Take your time and be absolutely

certain since mistakes are expensive. I still feel the best advice

is to try somehow to borrow or rent a camera, and run at least 10

rolls of film through it. You will either know that this is the

camera for you, or that your search continues. Leicas are

romanticized in the photographic press, but not everyone gets along

with RF cameras. The good thing is, that unlike all of

the "wonderplastic" out there, when you've made your decision... the

cameras will be there.

 

<p>

 

As far as your lens choice, is it the focal length or the lens speed

that has drawn you to the 75mm summilux? If it is the focal length,

a 90mm Elmarit M simply can't be beat when you factor in the cost to

the performance. They are readily available for under 1000 Dollars.

At only 15mm over the 75, you won't notice the difference in most

situations. If the speed is your goal, the 50mm Summilux will get

you the speed at a more affordable price and smaller package. The

difference from the 75mm lens is only a couple of steps forward.

Again, there is great savings on the price of this lens over the 75.

 

<p>

 

Just don't be impulsive. With your monetary situation, your move has

to be the right one. You also have the benefit of a couple of

hundred years of experience in this forum, so don't hesitate to ask

for help. Just remember everyone is different, so weigh any advise

against your personality and desires.

>>As far as your lens choice, is it the focal length or the lens

speed that has drawn you to the 75mm summilux? If it is the focal

length, a 90mm Elmarit M simply can't be beat when you factor in the

cost to the performance. They are readily available for under 1000

Dollars. At only 15mm over the 75, you won't notice the difference in

most situations. If the speed is your goal, the 50mm Summilux will

get you the speed at a more affordable price and smaller package. The

difference from the 75mm lens is only a couple of steps forward.

Again, there is great savings on the price of this lens over the 75.

 

<p>

 

...Thanks again Al. Great advice in all.

 

<p>

 

As for the focal length, I am ASSUMING something grand here: I

generally shoot with a standard and a tele lens, but I really want

just one lens. And given <i>that</i> choice, since I shoot people and

'like' the telescopic perspective/distance (and the benefits of not

cropping-in on a 35-50mm lens), I have been, as I say, assuming the

75 is the best bridge for one lens to a 50-90mm shooter.

 

<p>

 

[90mm lenses (well, to be honest in my case a couple of 85mm lenses,

Contax and Nikon), just seem a little long in a lot of indoor

situations, especially when you want more than 3/4s of a human body.]

 

<p>

 

However, given the price of a 40mm lens (40 Rokkor esp.), and a 90

(the old 2.8 seems great?), I know it might be better to bite the

bullet and go with 2 lenses.

 

<p>

 

But there is a romance to a single 75mm lens that I can't explain

away. I wish I could try all this stuff before purchasing, I mean

really try it as you say, for a few rolls of film, not just try all

these bodies and some 50mm lens I'll never buy...in the store.

 

<p>

 

The 75 might end up being fancy like Keats' Nightingale...and the 40-

90 combo might be as timeless as his Urn...the latter is obviously

much more practical in real-time shooting...for once I'm not going to

be impulsive. Not with a body, and not with my choice of glass...

 

<p>

 

As for the 1.4 of the 75mm Leica, that's pretty much pure romance and

material lust...I shoot in bars quite often/in homes as well, but I

prefer to use EF in these cases, because I LOVE as much DoF as

possible. I've never really like shallow DoF except when explicitly

in order for the scene at hand...