Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica M Film Cameras

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

M6 Classic 0.85x... Mine has 28mm framelines?
Old 01-12-2018   #1
happy
Registered User
 
happy is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 67
M6 Classic 0.85x... Mine has 28mm framelines?

I have owned this camera for a couple months or so and noticed a while back that it actually has 28mm framelines! They aren't terribly useful as you can't ever see them all at once, but they're there nonetheless.

Youxin (over the phone, without looking at the camera) told me that my camera is likely a .72, even though the window says .85. But I'm all but certain it's a .85, the magnification is very noticeably and significantly higher magnification than my M9-P finder.

Any of you run across a .85 with 28mm framelines? Just curious about this oddity.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-12-2018   #2
Richard G
Registered User
 
Richard G's Avatar
 
Richard G is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: 37,47 S
Posts: 4,873
The M9-P finder is much wider than a film M. Youxin must be right. The 28 lines in the M9-P will be easier to see than in a film M.
__________________
Richard
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-12-2018   #3
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,776
M9-P is a .68 finder. Youxin is right.
The 28mm frame lines are very hard to see on my Ms that have the .72 finder.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-12-2018   #4
happy
Registered User
 
happy is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard G View Post
The M9-P finder is much wider than a film M. Youxin must be right. The 28 lines in the M9-P will be easier to see than in a film M.
I really don't think so. It's a .68 vs a .72. Shouldn't be as big of a difference as I'm seeing. The M9 viewfinder is significantly wider, the focus patch is much smaller in the finder as well.

When I put my 1.25x magnifier on the M9, objects in the viewfinder are almost exactly the same size/magnification as my M6.

edit-
I put the 1.25x on the M6 finder and when I switch between left and right eye, the image through the finder is larger than life-size. This is a .85 finder.

Last edited by happy : 01-12-2018 at 23:12. Reason: edited instead of double post
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #5
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 77
Posts: 5,534
I don't think the difference between a .68 and a .72 would be noticeable either! I believe you have a .85 with a 28mm frame. Leitz must have used a frameline mask with 28mm frameline, that's all. It is what it is.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #6
Richard G
Registered User
 
Richard G's Avatar
 
Richard G is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: 37,47 S
Posts: 4,873
That’s good. Always wanted to try a 0.85 finder. Briefly looked through an M3 once and hated the rounded corners.
__________________
Richard
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #7
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 5,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy View Post
I have owned this camera for a couple months or so and noticed a while back that it actually has 28mm framelines! They aren't terribly useful as you can't ever see them all at once, but they're there nonetheless.
Does the frame line show when the frame line preview lever is pushed all the way toward the lens mount?

Just wondering if you're maybe confusing the 35mm frame for a 28mm frame line...
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #8
happy
Registered User
 
happy is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
Does the frame line show when the frame line preview lever is pushed all the way toward the lens mount?

Just wondering if you're maybe confusing the 35mm frame for a 28mm frame line...
Yes that is correct. They also show with the 90mm lines when I have my 90 cron mounted
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #9
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 77
Posts: 5,534
So that's what it is! Yes the 28 and 90mm framelines appear together.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #10
pepeguitarra
Registered User
 
pepeguitarra's Avatar
 
pepeguitarra is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 818
My M6 is a 0.85 and I can barely see the 35mm frames without glasses. With glasses, I have to swirl my eyes around to see it, so I just do not bother. I do not recall shooting 28mm with it. I just check, if I push the frame selector all the way to the lens, I only get ONE small frame, the 28 is not there.
__________________
It is not a photo until you print it! Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #11
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,776
RF camera with the best 28mm frame lines is the CLE. Super clear and easy to see.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #12
happy
Registered User
 
happy is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepeguitarra View Post
My M6 is a 0.85 and I can barely see the 35mm frames without glasses. With glasses, I have to swirl my eyes around to see it, so I just do not bother. I do not recall shooting 28mm with it. I just check, if I push the frame selector all the way to the lens, I only get ONE small frame, the 28 is not there.
I can barely see all of the 35mm frames without moving my eyes around. The 28 frame is much wider and I can only see part of the frame lines as I move my eye around and I have to put my eye very close
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #13
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 77
Posts: 5,534
Wait a minute. Are you saying you can see the 28mm framelines in the same field as the 90mm framelines? Or have you found that you were seeing the 35mm frameline and mistakenly thought they were for the 28mm? The 35mm framelines would appear in the same field as the 135mm ones (lever pulled all the way away from the lens mount). The 28mm lines appear along with the 90mm ones (lever moved all the way in near the lens mount).
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #14
happy
Registered User
 
happy is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 67
I am seeing the 28 lines with the 90. The 35 I see with the 135 lines.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #15
Highway 61
Revisited
 
Highway 61's Avatar
 
Highway 61 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,699
Your M6 is a 0.72.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #16
happy
Registered User
 
happy is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 67
Anyone that thinks it’s a .72 want to make a friendly wager? Haha

I’m like 99.9% sure it’s a .85. I was shooting this alongside a .85 silver ttl literally just two or three weeks ago. I shot both side by side to see which I wanted to keep... I opted for the classic because the 50mm lines are unbroken on the bottom. I think I would have noticed the difference then, the difference between the m9 and my m6 is immediately noticeable.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #17
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,776
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #18
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
RF camera with the best 28mm frame lines is the CLE. Super clear and easy to see.
Let's not forget Bessa R4A/M....its 28mm frame lines are single, uncluttered and very clear. Plenty of eye relief as well.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #19
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,640
It was a few years ago but I'm pretty sure when I had my m6 .85x the 35mm frame lines were right on the edge and I had to put my eye really close to see them.
  Reply With Quote

His: From your link
Old 01-13-2018   #20
pepeguitarra
Registered User
 
pepeguitarra's Avatar
 
pepeguitarra is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 818
His: From your link

0.85x (option, 1998-today)

The best modern finder is the optional 0.85x finder. It's not as good as the M3's finder, but gets us halfway back to perfection.

The 0.85x finder is better than the standard 0.72x finder for use with all lenses. It doesn't offer a 28mm frame, but the 28mm frame of the 0.72x finders don't really count anyway.

The 0.85x 35mm finder frame is big, but not quite as big as the 28mm frame in the 0.72x finder. If you dislike it, use 35mm lenses with the optics for the M3, and your camera will automatically select your 50mm frame to match the reduced image. This works great, just like it does on the M3.

The 0.85x finder certainly can't show the 28mm frame lines, since the 0.72x barely can, so they are excused. If you shoot 28mm, you use an external finder.

Thus the 0.85x finder shows the 90mm frame by itself, the 50/75mm frames together and the 35/135mm frames together.

The 0.85x option also works with lenses with auxiliary viewfinder optics.
__________________
It is not a photo until you print it! Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #21
pepeguitarra
Registered User
 
pepeguitarra's Avatar
 
pepeguitarra is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 818
There is some Frankesteinishing in some of those cameras. It is known that some repairmen interchange pieces with other cameras.
__________________
It is not a photo until you print it! Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #22
brennanphotoguy
Registered User
 
brennanphotoguy's Avatar
 
brennanphotoguy is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Nashville, TN
Age: 28
Posts: 936
No way. The frame lines for 35mm on a .85 finder are hard to see at best. You probably have a .72 finder.
__________________
M3 / IIIg / Rollei 3.5E3
www.instagram.com/brennan_mckissick
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #23
Richard G
Registered User
 
Richard G's Avatar
 
Richard G is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: 37,47 S
Posts: 4,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepeguitarra View Post
There is some Frankesteinishing in some of those cameras. It is known that some repairmen interchange pieces with other cameras.
This must be the explanation. What then would be of interest is whether the 28mm frame lines in the OP's camera actually cover less area than his proper 0.85 35mm frame lines. Or occupy roughly the same position. By moving the frame selection lever, the 28 frame lines would ordinarily be quite a long out from the 35 lines. If the OP is correct about the 0.85 finder, and I now assume he is, then he has 0.85 specific 35, 50 and 90 frame lines, and his 28 frame lines should be little different to his 35 frame lines.
__________________
Richard
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #24
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,142
Out of curiosity, I checked my M6 Classic 0.85x and it does NOT have 28mm frames. Mine has never been touched, AFAIK.

If the 28mm framelines were there, just way outside the "normal" eye position, that would be kind of nice I suppose, in a pinch?
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #25
pepeguitarra
Registered User
 
pepeguitarra's Avatar
 
pepeguitarra is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
Out of curiosity, I checked my M6 Classic 0.85x and it does NOT have 28mm frames. Mine has never been touched, AFAIK.

If the 28mm framelines were there, just way outside the "normal" eye position, that would be kind of nice I suppose, in a pinch?
I have a little Canon viewfinder that came with my Canon LTM 28/3.5 and I use it as an external assistant.
__________________
It is not a photo until you print it! Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-13-2018   #26
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,142
Well I don't know about you but I occasionally forget my viewfinders.......
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2018   #27
Robert Lai
Registered User
 
Robert Lai is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,610
When I had an M7 0.85, the 35mm frame line was already out to the edges. I don't know how there is space to fit in the 28mm frame lines. Even 35mm required pan and scan with my eyeball, just to see the entire image. I know I never had the 28mm frame line.

Either someone has modified your camera, or there is a factory error and the regular frame line set for 90 / 28 was put into your viewfinder.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2018   #28
A.S.
Registered User
 
A.S. is offline
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy View Post
Iím like 99.9% sure itís a .85. I was shooting this alongside a .85 silver ttl literally just two or three weeks ago. I shot both side by side to see which I wanted to keep... I opted for the classic because the 50mm lines are unbroken on the bottom. I think I would have noticed the difference then, the difference between the m9 and my m6 is immediately noticeable.
I'm pretty sure all 0.85x Leica M's have their bottom 50mm framelines broken (due to the increase in magnification, and how that impedes upon the metering display). My M6 "Classic" certainly does.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2018   #29
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,776


  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2018   #30
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,254
Since the .85 has the 90mm framelines, is it possible that it uses the same internal parts as the .72 and the 28mm framelines are not visible due to magnification unless the viewfinder is misaligned?
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2018   #31
happy
Registered User
 
happy is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 67
Hmm very interesting. Either the frame line masks from a .72 were used or the front window from a .85 was used as it says .85 on the window. Maybe I do have a .72? I don’t have the camera in front of me but I’ll have to do more investigating.

FWIW the 28mm lines on my m6 are really far out to the edges of the window, you really have to move your eye far away from center to see them. The 35mm lines look a tiny bit smaller than the 28mm lines on my M9. The mystery remains unsolved for now...
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2018   #32
happy
Registered User
 
happy is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 67
Does anyone with an m9 or m240 and a .72 M camera want to take a look and tell me how much bigger the focusing patch looks in the .72? My focusing patch looks like 30-50% bigger on the m6
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2018   #33
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
Since the .85 has the 90mm framelines, is it possible that it uses the same internal parts as the .72 and the 28mm framelines are not visible due to magnification unless the viewfinder is misaligned?
Very interesting! And if that is not the case, perhaps Leica put in the .72 set anyway as that is what they had lying around.
I do not say that in jest, there were a whole bunch of M-As produced that did not have the correct M-A shutter speed dial, but apparently randomly had the one from the M-P that has the 'meter off' setting. The M-A does not have a meter.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2018   #34
A.S.
Registered User
 
A.S. is offline
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy View Post
or the front window from a .85 was used as it says .85 on the window. Maybe I do have a .72? I donít have the camera in front of me but Iíll have to do more investigating.
It's probably an 0.85x M6 with its original top plate (and outer windows), with the rest of its rf/vf replaced with a 0.72x. I vaguely recall an ad on here selling such an M (or maybe it was reversed) a couple of years ago.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2018   #35
Livesteamer
Registered User
 
Livesteamer is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Winston Salem North Carolina
Posts: 1,361
In early 2000 I bought an M6 .85 new, one of the original batch of about 2000 cameras. By that time I had to hunt for one and got it from Koh's camera. The 35mm lines are all the way out to the edge and hard to see. I mostly use it for 50mm. There is no way 28mm frame lines could be put into that .85 finder unless Leica made a very different .85 finder. More likely it's like my first M3. Bits of this and bits of that but hey, it works. Joe
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2018   #36
Highway 61
Revisited
 
Highway 61's Avatar
 
Highway 61 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy View Post
I’m like 99.9% sure it’s a .85.
Looks like the 0.1% minority was a powerful lobby there, because it's a .72.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2018   #37
Activatedfx
Registered User
 
Activatedfx's Avatar
 
Activatedfx is offline
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 9
FWIW, on my M7 .85 (late model with MP finder), the 35mm frame lines are all the way out to the sides. Need to move my eye around to see them. Lever pushed to the right shows 90mm frame and no 28mm lines.

35/135 and 50/75 frame lines have a space in the bottom line. 90 does not.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2018   #38
happy
Registered User
 
happy is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 67
Okay here is a controlled (but unscientific) experiment... I took some pictures with my cell phone through the viewfinders of my M9-P and M6 classic with and without 1.25x magnifier

The images were all resized by the same % and I overlaid four red lines, each the exact same length.




Few things I noticed:

M6 viewfinder is noticeably bigger. Makes sense because the M9 has a thicker body. This explains why Leica went from .72 to .68 when they went digital... The thicker body and smaller finder means the magnification needs to be lower to see the same frame lines.

M6 is far more "zoomed in" with the magnifier compared to the M9. 50mm lines are all but unusable on the M6 + 1.25x mag. M9 works great with magnifier and 50mm lines.

1.25x magnifier makes the size of the viewfinder smaller.

M9-P with 1.25x magnfier (.85x resulting magnification) shows images through the finder at the exact same size as my M6 without magnifier.



I'm satisfied that it's a .85 with .72 frame masks put in for some reason.

Thoughts?
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2018   #39
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy View Post

Thoughts?
First off, what are you watching on tv?

And why would you resize the images? If they were all taken with the same cell phone at the same distance from the vf, resizing them defeats the whole point of the exercise of seeing the size differences.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2018   #40
happy
Registered User
 
happy is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 67
In case it wasn't clear in my earlier posts, on my M6 .85 I can just barely see all of the 35mm lines, with my eye somewhat uncomfortably close to the finder. Nevertheless, I can clearly see that there is a wider set of 28mm lines. There is no hope of seeing the left and right sides without moving my eye around a LOT inside the window. I can't even see the top and bottom frame lines together. I have to move my eye around to do that. Actually, even on my M9-P I can see a good deal of space 'around' my 28mm lines if I move my eye around very far off of center. Give it a try! I swear there's a gap there if you look for it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
First off, what are you watching on tv?

And why would you resize the images? If they were all taken with the same cell phone at the same distance from the vf, resizing them defeats the whole point of the exercise of seeing the size differences.
Battle of the Sexes, movie about Billie Jean King


I resized them just so they'd fit on the same image. So that you can see the views through each viewfinder compared to each other. I scaled all four cell phone pictures all by the same %



Here are the pics unedited:
https://imgur.com/a/7YPEe

I positioned my phone camera so it was touching the eyecup, so yes, taken all from the same distance from viewfinder.

Last edited by happy : 01-15-2018 at 22:18. Reason: Added unedited pics
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 00:54.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.