Undersized 50mm Framelines

I knew the M6/7/MP 50mm viewfinder frame was undersized however I was surprised

after comparing to my SLR w 50mm. One needs to add the thickness of 3 to 4

brightline frames to approximate what will record on film. Would an external

finder be more accurate at the 6 to 15 ft range? How accurate is the 75mm

frame?

Actually, I believe the undersized 50mm frames started w/the M4-P. Yes, an external finder, whether a vintage Leitz SBOOI or modern Cosinva Voigtlander, are more accurate @ any distance beyond the closest focusing range of modern Leica lenses (0.5-0.7m), which is what the current 50mm framelines are designed to cover.

<...what will record on film.>

 

I believe it also matters whether you're using slide or negative film. My understanding is that the frames are sized for the visible area of a mounted slide, and so they will not show all that would be on a negative even at the minimum focusing distance.

 

I've complained about this in the past, but I've learned to live with it. (Not like it, but live with it.) Instead of counting frame line thicknesses -- who has time for that? -- I just compose tight when shooting at a distance and take what I get.

 

By the way, it's not as big a problem with the 35, which changes coverage less as it's focused, or with the 90, which still has the same minimum focus as it did 30 years ago (excepting the 90MEM).

 

Given the reasons why the 50 frame is "too small," I suspect the 75 has the same problem.

It seems futile to worry about the accuracy of the frame lines. There is nothing magic about the 24x36 format. It has been touted that it has some "aura" because it approximates the "golden rectangle" which is also frivolous in that that ratio applies to the arrangement of the subjects withing the scene and not the format itself. Additionally the 24x36 ratio was largely arbitrary since it resulted from doubling the cine format which in turn was determined by mechanical and not aesthetic limitations. A more realistic approach is to learn the field of the lenses one uses and compose the scene before mounting the camera. With the price of dedicated finders approaching that of the lenses they complement it is worth the effort to avoid dependence on the viewfinder as a compositional aid.

I always heard that people who were really concerned with image quality (as opposed to just paying lipservice to it as an excuse to buy very expensive gear)did their best to compose as close to the full area of the 35mm format to avoid unnecessary cropping and enlargement. That would be a good reason for wanting as accurate a viewfinder as possible, and for making some effort to understand how to get that in spite of the direct view of the Leica.

Jerry hits the nail on the head here. Dan's point that there's nothing magical about

the 24x36mm format is quite correct, but it has nothing to do with the point about

acurate framelines being desireable in an RF camera. The only thing wrong with

cropping is that it wastes negative space, and thus size, which is already at a high

premium with miniature format cameras like 35mm. <p>Experience with your tools

is the best remedy to this problem. External finders are a good idea, especially as

learnig devices (think training wheels) until you get a feel for the coverage of lenses

you use most often. I don't shoot much with 75mm focal length, and I use M3

cameras primarily, so I can't comment on the framelines for this lens, but I can say

that when using one on my M3, I look at the 50 and the 90 lines, and can see pretty

much what I will get. My little experience with an M6 suggest that this is still a

reasonable way to go- and it also suggests that you can trust the 75 framelines a

little more than the 50mm ones.

I find the 75mm framelines to be much more accurate than the 50mm frame with M6/M7/MP. The 50mm gives me the same view as the 60mm Elmarit on my R6. That's quite an error. I tend to use my 50 mostly on my M2 or M3 when possible, for this reason.

Johnathon's response (above) may be correct for the wrong reason. If I remember correctly, the 50mm and 35mm framelines in the later M series were based on what would be B&W printable IF the lenses were close-focused (.7 to 1+ meters). It just so happens that if you are taking 'chrome photos, the perimeters of the slide will be cut off by almost any mount you choose (cardboard, plastic, etc).

 

Composing to the limits of the framelines can be an exercise in futility if you hope to "fill the frame" and then be able to project the slide.

 

George (The Old Fud, who wishes everyone a friutful and Happy New Year)

Correct, but for the wrong reason...the story of my life!

 

Happy New Year, George and everyone, with best wishes for many more to come.

The undersized frame lines are a disgrace IMHO.

Parallax is a bigger concern for me than framelines. Why would anyone bother with Leicas and rangefinder photography? Everyone should be using Nikon F2s and Canon F-1s. ;*)

I am thinking of exchanging my 40 for a fast 50mm. I'm sure with experience one can estimate the 50mm field of view. The key word is experience which overcomes equipment limitations. I'm listening to hear if others believe finders are worth using or if a 75mm is easier to frame using the 75 and 50mm frames to judge edge placement. BTW, a 40mm and 35 frame line may be the most accurate pair.

Dan Flanders, dec 31, 2006; 04:52 p.m.: (snip) A more realistic approach is to learn the field of the lenses one uses and compose the scene before mounting the camera.

 

Dan, that's a visual I really wish I hadn't experienced. ;0)

 

I agree with your point as an ideal. I can shoot that way with a 24 and marginally well with a 35, but not with a 50.

Jerry, fair point about the tension between maximizing image quality and accepting approximate frame lines. But there's a very reasonable explanation of why Leica users accept this compromise.

 

For people who want to take handheld pictures in a fluid style, i.e., without locking the camera on a tripod and composing contemplatively, Leica offers direct vision, superb lenses, an ergonomic body, an instantaneously responsive shutter -- all in a robust, portable package.

 

In an ideal world, it would also have perfectly accurate frame lines, but most (not all) people who actually use Leicas come to accept the minor inconvenience of imperfect framing in exchange for all those other advantages. For many users, a slight loss in resolution or negligible increase in graininess is more than compensated by beautiful tonality, evenness of illumination, minimal distortion, etc.

 

For 35mm photographers who value accuracy of framing over quickness of operation, there is always the Leica R system.

 

You may not consider the trade-offs of the Leica system to be worthwhile for your particular type of photography. In that case, there are many other great systems to choose from.

 

There's no need to impugn the motives of Leica users. A Leica may seem like a piece of bling to someone who doesn't use one, but in 20-odd years of using a Leica, I have never met someone who bought one for that purpose. In fact for many participants in this forum, a Leica would be too inexpensive an item for them to impress their peers with. They would find the proposition laughable.

Thanks to those who gave opinions based on experience. As in most things, experience is the ultimate teacher. Fortunately, I can crop on the easel as a compromise. The goal remains to see things whole at the moment the shutter is released. No shame in using a framing aid as many of HCB's decisive moments are the result of his patience, planning and thoughtful composition. Technique can overcome equipment limitations.

<i>You may not consider the trade-offs of the Leica system to be worthwhile for your particular type of photography. In that case, there are many other great systems to choose from.

 

There's no need to impugn the motives of Leica users. A Leica may seem like a piece of bling to someone who doesn't use one, but in 20-odd years of using a Leica, I have never met someone who bought one for that purpose. In fact for many participants in this forum, a Leica would be too inexpensive an item for them to impress their peers with. They would find the proposition laughable</i></p> ROFL!! First you make wild and inaccurate inferences from what I wrote, accuse me of impugning the motives of Leica users, and then wind up your rant slamming them yourself. Too funny!

 

IMO anyone who considers himself a serious and knowledgeable enough photographer to feel he needs a camera and lenses that cost several times more than most anything else in 35mm and nowadays medium format too, should be dedicated enough to his craft to develop an experience-based instinct for outsmarting the limits of the frame lines. That is not to say it would be necessary or desirable in every shooting situation or for every shooter, but for someone--like the originator of the thread--who is concerned enough to be comparing it to his SLR, there's nothing other than laziness preventing anyone from utilizing the Leica for accurate framing if that's what's important to him. In fact only a handful of SLR's show 100% in the finder, and what they don't show is masked off. At least with the Leica you can see beyond the framelines.

<ROFL...there's nothing other than laziness preventing anyone from utilizing the Leica for accurate framing if that's what's important to him.>

 

Jerry, I'm glad I helped you start the year off with a good laugh. In the end, however, you seem to be agreeing with me that the frameline issue is not so big a deal as people might think when they first start to use the system.

 

However, I wouldn't go so far as you do and call photographers who haven't yet mastered Leica framing, or any other particular skill, lazy. I would rather say they are "still learning," a position many of us have been in with regard to using Leica framelines and that all of us are in, in regard to some skill or other.

 

In any event, Happy New Year.

Johnathan -

 

I'm "still learning;" however, I did a sneaky trick in the mid 70's and had M2 framelines installed in our M4. Now, the M4 provides reasonably accurate 35 and 50 framelines, with the 90 framelines having corners. Our M7 is still a learning process. Too many framelines!!

 

It's still time for a "Happy New Year" salutation to all in the Western Hemisphere - - but it's now 9:20 am Tuesday, 2 January, in New Zealand.

I hope this thread contributes to better understanding the M 50mm frame lines. Better images are the result of thoughtful effort to fully know your equipment and materials. Luck favors the prepared.

George, I'd do the same -- have the older, larger framelines installed in my MP -- except that I use a .58, for which the larger framelines have never been available.

 

Maybe it's just time to get a SBOOI and be done with it.

 

Allbest.

<I>However, I wouldn't go so far as you do and call photographers who haven't yet mastered

Leica framing, or any other particular skill, lazy. I would rather say they are "still learning,"

</I><P>

 

Surely leica must offer academies and special programs to help users master framing. Right?

<I> A Leica may seem like a piece of bling to someone who doesn't use one, but in 20-odd

years of using a Leica, I have never met someone who bought one for that purpose.</i><P>

 

Well, how about all the threads in the past here that equate leica cams with fine timepieces,

writing instruments, and motorcars (aka watches, pens, and autos)?

<Well, how about all the threads in the past here that equate leica cams with fine timepieces, writing instruments, and motorcars (aka watches, pens, and autos)?>

 

I believe that members of this forum who use or collect those items do so because they sincerely appreciate their special functionality or the workmanship that goes into them.

 

In my own experience, I have a friend who collects fine timepieces. His interest stems from his background in mechanical engineering.

 

Another friend writes with a fine fountain pen. He prefers the tactile experience of the wet ink flowing through the nib. I doubt many people realize or care that he uses such a relatively expensive, old-tech device, and I'm certain he doesn't care whether they realize or care.

 

A third friend would appear to collect cars, though he really just buys what he needs for different situations at his various homes, and since price is no object to him, he buys the best.

 

What Leica has in common with these other objects, other than relatively high price, is fine workmanship and special functionality. I don't see a problem with appreciating these qualities.

 

Absent specific evidence in a particular case, I am not so skeptical of my fellow man as to attribute superficial motives to him. I prefer to think the best of people.

 

Peace, Brad.

Johnathon -

 

You and I agree - possibly on different planes. My first Leica was a IIIc that I bought (in Germany) in 1945. My second was an M4 I bought as soon as they were available in the US. My third was a "Wetzlar" M6 that now resides with a friend. My fourth was /is an M7 that serves us well.

 

The so-called "Leica Mystique" never entered my mind. I just had a series of rangefinders that served me very well over the years.

 

I was in the Army when I purchased the IIIc - - in the Air Force when I purchased the M4 and the M6 - - and gracefully? retired when I purchased the M7.

 

Leica cameras have been either in my pocket or around my neck since 1945. One or more of these have been with me in many of the Southwest States in the US and where we now live in the Washington DC area. One or more have been with me in Thule, Iceland, Alaska, Japan, Guam, Thailand, China, The British Isles, France, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Greece, North Africa, Canada, Holland, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Austria, New Zealand, ands a few other places I would not rather not mention.

 

Simply stated - - I am an agnostic when it comes to the reverence and incense-burning offered unto the Leica Red Button.

 

I am one who merely has used these cameras since 1945 to photograph where I have been and what I have seen - - - - and without a whimper or a burp from any one of these cameras for over sixty years.

 

George - Who at almost 84, has used these to record personal history_)

George, I'll probably be down in DC sometime in the next few months and I'd love to have lunch or a drink with you. May I get in touch when I hit town?