Doing it properly just the once.

[blakley]

Trevor,

 

I have a .72 MP, and my glasses are about -3 diopters. I have GREAT difficulty seeing anything outside of the 35mm frame, and I have to sort of press myself against the camera to see all of the frame itself. I'd say go with the .58 if you're going to shoot 35mm most of the time. I use 50 and 75mm lenses on my MP most of the time, which gives me lots of room around the edges.

[squareframe]

buy the D200 and never look back ...

[jasper1]

buy the D200 and never look back ...

 

Or forward....

[vivek iyer]

I keep reading threads on D200:

 

1. New camera with a dead pixel.

 

2. Focusing problem (compared to a D70s!).

 

3. Battery problem.

 

(I am positive there are plenty more to come...)

 

 

For $1,700, there are better gear to be bought.

 

Amazing to see people queing up to buy such gizmos!

[squareframe]

tough choice .. state-of-the-art camera or one as old as photography itself, of dubious service whilst wearing glasses, and requiring selection of a compromise of viewfinder framelines.

 

a camera should serve the purpose and the photographer. your notion of owning a Leica rangefinder seems to be in your disservice and an obstacle to moving ahead.

 

I say this, not with any ill-intent towards an archaic camera-system, but based on your Bessa experience, eyesight-requirements, and desire to enjoy the benefits afforded through digital evolution.

 

fair winds ...

[norman_mayersohn]

Trevor, it make some difference whether you use your left or right eye on the viewfinder. With your right eye, a .72 might be O.K. For me, being left-eyed, the .58 is a far better match for the 35mm focal length (and the lone visible frameline is a bonus). Focus accuracy resulting from the difference in baseline length is not an issue, even wide open.

[andy m.]

Will you also be obtaining a film scanner to go with the M6? I ask because I am sorely tempted by a D200 myself and would view cutting out the developing step (I currently develop my own, but only for B+W) as a significant advantage, and I certainly can't get scans with my flatbed scanner (even from 120 film) that give particularly impressive prints at say 12 x 12.

 

In the wet darkroom it is very hard to match the versatility of PS without dedicating hours in the dark (at a public darkroom in my case), and I have yet to find a custom printer that can match my requirements in the same way that I can on my own PC.

 

I am not anti-film- I'm 100% film-based at the moment, but suspect that once I get a digital camera I will use it more often than my old gear.

 

Good luck and good light, A

[tom h.]

If you can, just get it. Life's short, and even though you can follow your photo muse with a

camera that's an enth the price, an M6 is a cracking machine that will make you think about

how you're doing what you're doing. By its limitations, it will take your eye in different

directions. I agonised over (the price of) it, at first, but never

regretted it afterwards. Single biggest disadvantage- If you drop it, you're mailing it to re-

align the focus.Second single biggest disadvantage- you'll buy another lens.and then

another. and another. It won't improve your photography even a smidgeon( you do fine

without it), but it is nice to use.I'll bet you deserve it.

[jtdnyc]

Trevor

 

Another vote from a glasses-wearer for the .58. Remember, at any distance other than the closest focusing distance, the frame lines show less than you will get on the film...thus, you really do want to be able to see outside the frame lines.

 

Even if you don't wear glasses, the .58 allows you to see the entire field of view without "scanning." With my glasses off, I can see the entire field of view on a .72 or even a .85, but I have to move my eyeball around to do so. This would slow me down when shooting on the fly. No problem when composing carefully with the camera on a tripod, but I'll bet you'd use an SLR for those shots, anyway.

 

If you do eventually opt to use longer lenses, you can always add the 1.25 viewfinder magnifier.

 

Good luck whatever your decision.

[richard_nunamaker]

Trevor-- I have two M6TTL bodies, both with the .58 viewfinder. I shoot street

scenes primarily with a 35mm 'cron, then the 28mm, the 90mm and lastly the

50mm. I really like the .58 viewfinder, and have had no focussing problems

even with the 90mm. I, too, wear spectacles (fitted with transition lenses). I

really think the .58/35mm is a perfect combination.

[jasper1]

your notion of owning a Leica rangefinder seems to be in your disservice and an obstacle to moving ahead.

 

A disservice is having limited horizons dude. Use both dude,don't a religious zealot, enjoy both.

[terry_rory]

Yes I am left eyed with any camera. (Hadn't thought about that before, thanks for making me consider it.)

 

The D200 ? Not an 'either/or' issue.

 

Just a question of caution and time and cost. I will not be anyones 'Beta tester' especially Nikon's. And I am not happy to pay full RRP for the dubious pleasure of being 'one of the first'.

 

My D70 was 2/3rds of its launch price when I bought it and came from the series after the BGLOD fault and back focus faults and....etc etc. I have never have a minutes problem with it and it is a pleasure to use every day. I predict that if I buy my D200 around late summer/autumn it will be well under 1000 GBP (1299 GBP currently) and will be a very well sorted machine by then with lots of 'tweaks' incorporated.

 

It is not a question of looking forward or backwards it is a question of seeing if I can crack this rangefinder 'thing' with the real article, a Leica M with a classic 35mm Summicron. (The caution I spoke of comes into play again, if we dont get along I lose nothing but film and dev costs when I sell.)

 

I have never heard of a digital camera and a film camera refusing to get in the same camera bag together so if they are happy and I am happy then other peoples happiness regarding film or digital is their problem not mine. Too many people get all screwed up over over what other people use. There are better things to worry about.

 

The scanner? Yes if this all works out then I am thinking of a Nikon Coolscan V. We shall see.

 

Thanks. Keep the thoughts coming. It is all good.

[billsr]

While the .58 viewfinder does provide a bit more room at the edges, I much prefer the larger image and RF patch obtained on the .72 finder although you DO have to move in close when donning glasses. It isn't a hardship for me to use the .72. Best regards, Bill

[astral]

I can tell you that (optically) life doesn't get easier, so it might be worth planning ahead a little.

 

At "fifty-something-plus-or-thereabouts" of age I use varifocal, plastic lensed spectacles; these are prone to out-of-focus effects (top vs bottom of lens) when I squint through both my M2 (.72) and M6TTL (.58) finder.

 

I actually prefer my M2 v/f even though I have to risk scratched specs in order to see outside the 35mm lines. The M6 (with rubber eye-piece) allows me to see well outside the 35mm framelines, but its 'smaller' v/f doesn't quite feel as nice to use with 50mm or 75/90mm lenses as the 'bigger' M2 v/f.

 

So, my advice is not to rush - I'd reccomend that you really should try a .72 and .58 finder side by side, especially if you think you could join Spectacle-Wearers-Anonymous before you part with the camera, and if you will regularly use 50mm+ lenses.

 

Alan C, Robin Hood County (Nottinghamshire), UK

[jasper1]

Dudes are still painting with brushes, and creating great Art: don�t be some tehnology dud head spouting some religious believe.

[squareframe]

uh ... yeah, dude. the proposition was either/or, not buy one of each. respectfully, this thread reeks of 'I know what makes sense, but if I buy a Leica and it doesn't work out for me, at least I have joined an elite club (cult)'.

 

the way the question was posited, it seems clear that the rangefinder architecture should be approached warily, and that the D200 would be a logical progression from a successful D70 tenure. if not, how many camera systems does one buy, and sell, before the obvious shines through?

 

the D200 seems a very logical choice, though you may be demoted here on this forum.

[terry_rory]

I use Nikon aspherical profiled spectacles with hard coatings and have only ever used plastic lensed specs when riding a motorbike (bumble bees have hit me in the lenses 3 times in the past and a large bumble bee at 70mph is no joke if wearing glass lenses with a visor open in summer!)

 

My prescription has not changed since I was 24 years old. I am 46 and get eyes tested twice a year by qualified Opthalmologist. Focussing between about 6 inches and infinity is still not a problem (with specs) and about 3 inches to 2 feet is perfect without aid of specs. I have worked in front of computer screens every day for 26 years and never had any eyestrain or any need for varifocals or bifocals or special glasses for VDUs.

[jasper1]

D200 would be a logical progression from a successful D70 tenure. if not, how many camera systems does one buy, and sell, before the obvious shines through?

 

My goodness.Is this dude some sort of human robot? Creativity is about being trying different tools and different perspectives of creavity.

 

It worked out with this but i'll think i'll try this just to see.

[terry_rory]

"and start accumulating lenses.."

 

Peter, you may have noticed my budget will just about stretch to a good used M6 and a good used 35/2. I also mentioned that saving at least 300 GBP from the cost of my digital upgrade is one good reason for me to wait. So (respectfully you understand) thanks the nice idea of being able to invest in lots of Leica glass but the money isnt going to be there. (Sad but true) I am not poor and I am not rich but lots of other things apart from a tasty toolkit of Leica lenses need my money.

 

Nice idea though.

[jasper1]

You will comply we have the technology.

[terry_rory]

LOL

[terry_rory]

I have to go to bed now so I will leave you all to continue this thread and look forward to its conclusion tomorrow. I leave Pete sipping cocktails in his smart penthouse whilst choosing which Summilux (the black paint or the titanium?) to mount on the Iridium MP before he sets out for lunch with the ambassador's wife and I go off to bed with a dream of finding a half decent 35/2 that hasn't had its lens hood used as a torque grip by a 17 stone rugby player/Leica user.

[jasper1]

You will be assimilated Trevor Hare.

 

You will believe and become part of our collective. We speak with one voice and we are very happy, you will be very happy, or you will be e exterminated.

 

We are the voice of the Mysterons a superior life form

 

.Comply, comply.

[dan flanders]

Years ago when there were not so many VF choices I started carrying a universal VF (Nikon Zoom) and practiced judging lens coverage without using the camera. I found that for practical purposes I could use the frames of my glasses for judging the coverage of my lenses. It then occurred to me that if I composed the scene before mounting the camera I could use the one on the camera for a sighting device only. Sine then I have been free of viewfinder tyrrany and have my picture composed before mounting the camera. Of course I have to allow a certain amount for cropping, but that's no problem because I am not a slave to the 2:3 format either. Currently I have several finders, both universal and dedicated, but find that I rarely use them for their intended purpose, but for learning the field of new lenses.

[jtdnyc]

Trevor, think ahead: if enough people follow your lead to Nikon digital, you may then be able to afford all the Leica glass you would ever want. Though, at that point, the issue of .58 vs. .72 would be moot; you'd be able to get one of each.