frame line

[TJV]

Hi all. Just wondering if through out the M line there is a variance in the accuracy of the frame lines. I know there are some models that use the same frame masks and that the older ones are supposedly more accurate used close. I've been using my M4-P lately and noticed quite a few frames that appear slightly frame off center compared to what what I composed as. I've been shooting M3, 7 and 6 for years but the M4-P is a relatively new addition. Does it have a rep for being less / more accurate compared to other models?

 

[maddoc]

The size of the frame lines were designed by Leica to show, what will be visible on a mounted slide (a little bit less than the full negative size). Since the field of view changes with focus, the size of the frame lines can be accurate either for close focus or infinity (or something in between) only. To my knowledge, Leica changed the size of the frame lines - starting from the later M4-P (the one with zinc top and flushed windows) models - to show the field of view for a different focal distance. (I have to read G. Osterloh again ... in his book it is well explained)

Cheers,

Gabor

 

[waileong]

The frame lines on my M7 are tighter than those on my M4 although they are both 0.72 finders. I wonder why.

 

[TJV]

The best Leica I've ever owned is an M3 which I ran into the ground. I loved that camera. The M4-P I like second although I feel I need to get to know it a little better. Mine is the brass top plate version, so I guess the frame lines are of the older variety. I should run a few basic tests to get a better feel for how it frames on film.

By the way, is there a way to put 0.85 finders into an M4-P?

That would be my perfect camera.

 

[maddoc]

The best Leica I've ever owned is an M3 which I ran into the ground. I loved that camera. The M4-P I like second although I feel I need to get to know it a little better. Mine is the brass top plate version, so I guess the frame lines are of the older variety. I should run a few basic tests to get a better feel for how it frames on film.

By the way, is there a way to put 0.85 finders into an M4-P?

That would be my perfect camera.

0.85x VF should be no problem with the M4-P (a quick email to Don from DAG should clarify this) except for the $$$ and time needed to do the conversion... It might be cheaper to sell the M4-P and get an M6TTL with 0.85x VF (these go for 1300 to 1400 recently)

 

[TJV]

I was thinking it would be a costly thing to have done and, at the end of the day, I'd probably just prefer another reconditioned M3.

 

[normclarke]

M Frame Lines

M Frame Lines

Hi,
This subject has been done to death on several forums, Andrew Nemeth's and Roger Hicks have covered this several times. When the redesigned finder for the M4-P was developed with the added lines the area for the 50 and 35 frames were set to the closer 0.7 focus of the then current lenses. I believe that it would be difficult to revert to former type within the current design. I had for a short while an M6TTL .85 which gave me an easy comparison to my M4 which I still prefer, the difference was more notable at the 50 setting than the 35 but was in the order of 10% less (more at infinity). A lot of shooter's ignore this feature but for documentary and landscape work I consider it a PITA.
A couple of years ago I sold a M6J finder to Peter at CRR as I did not think it was satisfactory for my needs. This was of the .85 mag, but only with the M4 configuration and the shrunk frames.

Cheers,

normclarke.

 

[Roger Hicks]

About a quarter of the way through the review below (of the Zeiss Ikon) you'll find comparisons of fields of view for a number of cameras and accessory finders:

http://www.rogerandfrances.com/photoschool/zeiss.html

Note that choosing the ZI as '100%' does NOT imply 100% accuracy, merely that I chose the ZI as the baseline because it was a ZI review.

A quote from the review:

What is really interesting is that the 85mm frame on the ZI is identical to the 90mm frame on the MP, while the 90mm finder on the M2 actually shows slightly more than the 85mm finder on the Zeiss Ikon.

Cheers,

R.

 

[ferider]

Like Gabor said. If your M4-P has recessed windows (and brass top) it will have the same sized framelines as M2, M4 and M4-2. If the windows are flush (zinc top) it will have the same (slightly smaller) windows as your M6 and M7. Only 50 and 35mm framelines changed throughout M history (in the middle of the M4P production), 28, 75, 90 and 135 always remained the same (in size), even though early 75 lenses had longer minimum focus than later ones.

ZI and Bessas have even smaller 35mm and 50mm framelines than M6, M7, etc, but nobody ever complains 🙂

You are saying your M4P framelines are "off-center". That should not happen. I have an M4P and it did that too in the beginning. There was a problem with the parallax movement, which had to be corrected via CLA. Remove the lens, and try to move the framelines with your finger, and you will see if there is an issue.

Best,

Roland.

 

[TJV]

You are saying your M4P framelines are "off-center". That should not happen. I have an M4P and it did that too in the beginning. There was a problem with the parallax movement, which had to be corrected via CLA. Remove the lens, and try to move the framelines with your finger, and you will see if there is an issue.

Best,

Roland.

Exactly. I think my frames are off center. What do you mean by take the lens off and move the frame lines? Do you mean with the frame line selector? What would I be looking for?
Thanks mate.
T

 

[januaryman]

Accurate framing has always been highly over rated, I think. 😉 If you really need a WYSIWYG finder, buy an SLR. I understand even the newer digital SLRs work well in this arena!

 

[ferider]

Hi T,

take the lens off and move the RF roller of the camera with your finger back and forth while looking through the viewfinder. See how the framelines move. Do the same with one of your other Leicas and compare.

Best,

Roland.