adavis47
Well-known
Doing some research on 75mm lens for M8.2 and the general consensus seems to be that the framelines for the 75mm lens do a very poor job at framing what the camera will record. Are the framelines individually adjustable as to the scene distance they represent?
Roger Hicks
Veteran
I use a 75 a fair amount on the M8.2 and find the frame lines quite good. How many people in this 'general consensus' have actually tried the combination?
And no, they're not individually adjustable. How could they be?
Tashi delek,
R.
And no, they're not individually adjustable. How could they be?
Tashi delek,
R.
adavis47
Well-known
Well, Reid Reviews speaks to the framing and I stumbled on it in some forums. Good to hear you don't see a issue.
As to adjusting framelines, I don't know how it could be, that's why I asked. I've long ceased to be surprised by what I don't know.
Thanks
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Sorry, didn't mean to come across as rude. Like you, I never cease to be amazed at the things I don't know, too.
But on the framing issue, after the M4-P and 75mm, and the M8 and 75mm, the MP and M8.2 are a breath of fresh air. No RF frame is ever going to be super-accurate, but hey, that's what (good) SLRs are for. Personally I've been surprisingly happy (I surprised myself) with even the 135/2.8 on both the M8 and the M8.2, though with the former you certainly have to 'learn' it a bit.
Tashi delek,
R.
adavis47
Well-known
Thanks Tashi. Your experience eases some concerns. Appreciate you taking the time.
sfokevin
Established
How do the 75mm frameline of the original M8 and the Upgraded/M8.2 compare?...
adavis47
Well-known
The framelines of the M8 were set for a distance of .7 meters. The framelines for the M8.2 are set for a distance of 2 meters. So, if you work with subjects that are normally more than 1 meter away the M8.2 should be more accurate. This info taken from Reid Reviews.
RichC
Well-known
I disagree with Roger - the frameline accuracy is rubbish! Lots of compensation needed.
This was my first rangefinder, and with all the praise heaped on the Leica finder, I was expecting better. You get used to it though - the M8 is my only camera, and I've had it 18 months now.
If the frameline upgrade wasn't priced outrageously, to deliberately put people off (I heard that Leica dealers hate the upgrade scheme), I'd get the upgrade! :bang:
Below, are the results of frameline accuracy tests which I did so that I know how much to compensate for, as I always had to crop my images - and from the results, I now know why! The m8 was mounted on a tripod, and Leica Capture used to load images onto my laptop, and the framelines drawn on the image immediately. So, the methodology was pretty sound.
Note that everyone says the M8 framing is very accurate at 1m - yes: for the bottom edge only!
I included the focusing patch (size is accurate), as I use it to gauge the compensation: for example, over 3m distance, I mentally add a third of the patch's height to the framelines (that leaves enough slack so I didn't accidentally frame too tightly and chop off something!); at close distances, I add two-thirds of the patch height to the top and left framelines only.
My camera has been serviced by Leica, so the framelines, including parallax correction, should be as accurate as they get.
I didn't keep the results for my 75mm lens, but they were so poor (edges of the images were way over a third of the distance between the 75mm and 50mm framelines) that I sold the lens. I bought a 90mm lens instead (framelines more accurate - about the same "slop" as the 35mm and 50mm lenses).
35mm lens
@ 1m:
@ 3m:
@ infinity:
50mm lens
@ 1m:
@ 3m:
@ infinity:
This was my first rangefinder, and with all the praise heaped on the Leica finder, I was expecting better. You get used to it though - the M8 is my only camera, and I've had it 18 months now.
If the frameline upgrade wasn't priced outrageously, to deliberately put people off (I heard that Leica dealers hate the upgrade scheme), I'd get the upgrade! :bang:
Below, are the results of frameline accuracy tests which I did so that I know how much to compensate for, as I always had to crop my images - and from the results, I now know why! The m8 was mounted on a tripod, and Leica Capture used to load images onto my laptop, and the framelines drawn on the image immediately. So, the methodology was pretty sound.
Note that everyone says the M8 framing is very accurate at 1m - yes: for the bottom edge only!
I included the focusing patch (size is accurate), as I use it to gauge the compensation: for example, over 3m distance, I mentally add a third of the patch's height to the framelines (that leaves enough slack so I didn't accidentally frame too tightly and chop off something!); at close distances, I add two-thirds of the patch height to the top and left framelines only.
My camera has been serviced by Leica, so the framelines, including parallax correction, should be as accurate as they get.
I didn't keep the results for my 75mm lens, but they were so poor (edges of the images were way over a third of the distance between the 75mm and 50mm framelines) that I sold the lens.
I bought a 90mm lens instead (framelines more accurate - about the same "slop" as the 35mm and 50mm lenses).35mm lens
@ 1m:
@ 3m:
@ infinity:
50mm lens
@ 1m:
@ 3m:
@ infinity:
adavis47
Well-known
Thanks for all the work RichC. In my readings I had found one place where someone went with the 90 over the 75 due to much better accuracy. One good thing is you're always capturing more which is better than less.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
I was talking about the M8.2. As I said, after the M8...
As for 'priced outrageously to put people off', I doubt it. Pulling an M8 apart and putting it together again with a new mask takes quite a while, apart from the expenses of tracking and transport.
Finally, even with the M8, I very soon learned to compensate for the frame size/position, except perhaps at 1 metre. You can say that I shouldn't have to, with a camera that expensive, but again as I said earlier, no RF frame can be as accurate as a good 100% SLR.
Cheers,
R.
As for 'priced outrageously to put people off', I doubt it. Pulling an M8 apart and putting it together again with a new mask takes quite a while, apart from the expenses of tracking and transport.
Finally, even with the M8, I very soon learned to compensate for the frame size/position, except perhaps at 1 metre. You can say that I shouldn't have to, with a camera that expensive, but again as I said earlier, no RF frame can be as accurate as a good 100% SLR.
Cheers,
R.
JohnTF
Veteran
I disagree with Roger - the frameline accuracy is rubbish! Lots of compensation needed.
I included the focusing patch (size is accurate), as I use it to gauge the compensation: for example, over 3m distance, I mentally add a third of the patch's height to the framelines (that leaves enough slack so I didn't accidentally frame too tightly and chop off something!); at close distances, I add two-thirds of the patch height to the top and left framelines only.
My camera has been serviced by Leica, so the framelines, including parallax correction, should be as accurate as they get.
I didn't keep the results for my 75mm lens, but they were so poor (edges of the images were way over a third of the distance between the 75mm and 50mm framelines) that I sold the lens.
Have you tried any auxiliary finders which you find useful?
It seems a bit crazy to me that not only are the 50mm frame sizes very small, but truly much smaller than the correct field of view. Is, say a 50mm auxiliary finder closer than the viewfinder for the 35mm?
I appreciate that I probably should do some of this leg work myself, but am perfectly happy to see and use your data. ;-) I just picked up a 135 bright line and will see how it goes with the 90. I have been asking about a viewfinder magnifier without definitive answers.
Perhaps Cosina can make lenses coded and matched to what the frame lines show, for less cost than the Leica Modification. ;-)
I also think one of their new zoom viewfinders may be in my future.
If the camera is so expensive to work on, it is a pity. I have two M2's, one was fitted with an M4 set of frames.
Regards, John
Ben Z
Veteran
I don't mean to question your sound methodology, but your results are completely different from mine, and, I suspect, most peoples'. Your results show an equal crop @ 3m and infinity, and especially with the 50mm, in reality the M8 (and any M) framelines show much less of the actual shot @ infinity than @ 3m. It's a progressive discrepancy as you move out to infinity, related to the loss of focal length with lens extension, a bona-fide optical phenomenon.