Brian Legge
Veteran
I finally picked up my first M - a nice smooth M4 - here in the forums.
I'm still running my first roll through it but already I'm realizing that I'm not as happy with the contrast of the patch as I expected. The patch is well defined but even my fixed lens rangefinders are easier to focus as the contrast is higher.
It the suggestion of the seller I'm going to try shooting a few more rolls to see if I acclimate to it as he believed the contrast was in line with M4/3/2s in general but if I do decide to have it CLA'd down the road...
Does anyone have suggestions on who is reliable and affordable for a rangefinder patch improvement? I've seen missed messages about some of the regulars for this particular issue and wasn't sure if there were specific people who were better than others for dealing with finder specific issues.
The camera is quite smooth and otherwise seems in good user condition so I'd rather not bring up returning it. I'm sincerely hoping its just a comfort thing and that my expectations were too high as has been insinuated but at this point I feel like I'd use a beater Canon P over it as the focusing is easier so far. :bang:
I'm still running my first roll through it but already I'm realizing that I'm not as happy with the contrast of the patch as I expected. The patch is well defined but even my fixed lens rangefinders are easier to focus as the contrast is higher.
It the suggestion of the seller I'm going to try shooting a few more rolls to see if I acclimate to it as he believed the contrast was in line with M4/3/2s in general but if I do decide to have it CLA'd down the road...
Does anyone have suggestions on who is reliable and affordable for a rangefinder patch improvement? I've seen missed messages about some of the regulars for this particular issue and wasn't sure if there were specific people who were better than others for dealing with finder specific issues.
The camera is quite smooth and otherwise seems in good user condition so I'd rather not bring up returning it. I'm sincerely hoping its just a comfort thing and that my expectations were too high as has been insinuated but at this point I feel like I'd use a beater Canon P over it as the focusing is easier so far. :bang:
ChrisN
Striving
I wonder if this camera has a specific problem, or if (as you have said) it is a matter of expectations? Do you know anyone with another M camera that you could compare it with? Given the age of the camera, if it hasn't yet had a decent CLA it would be worth doing to ensure future confidence and reliability, and any viewfinder problem could be identified and rectified during that service. My M4 has just been overhauled, with new shutter curtains, by Sherry Krauter. Not cheap, but an excellent job and the camera feels wonderful and performs beautifully. Sherry's a factory-trained technician, so she's well qualified to sort out any problems.
I progressed from a Canon P myself to the M4, and I certainly had no difficulty with the M4 focusing patch, so I suspect there may be something amiss.
I progressed from a Canon P myself to the M4, and I certainly had no difficulty with the M4 focusing patch, so I suspect there may be something amiss.
Brian Legge
Veteran
I'm going to head to a few camera shops early next week to see if they have an earlier M for comparison.
The camera was CLA'd according to the seller - though I don't know if the curtains were replaced. I'll shoot a few rolls to make sure I don't spot any other issues before making a decision.
The camera was CLA'd according to the seller - though I don't know if the curtains were replaced. I'll shoot a few rolls to make sure I don't spot any other issues before making a decision.
loplop
Member
Firstly, when you say the "focusing was easier" on your P, do you mean visually, or on film? If the former, I have a similar recent experience... My only M for quite awhile was a M3, and I'm finding a M4-P harder to focus quickly. That M3 finder is so nice; big, bright, resistant to flare, and somehow almost magically easy to focus even at large apertures.
My M4-P is getting a CLA now, and I hope it to be a bit brighter... But what I'm noticing is the lower magnification finder just isn't as easy, and the patch seems smaller.
I've never used a Canon P, but perhaps you're experiencing the same as me, the difficulty in moving from a higher magnification finder to a lower one.
That said... I love the ability to use a 28 and 35 without an external viewfinder, and I'm sure I'll get used to it in time. I know why folks hold on to their M3's, though, and I will do the same!
My M4-P is getting a CLA now, and I hope it to be a bit brighter... But what I'm noticing is the lower magnification finder just isn't as easy, and the patch seems smaller.
I've never used a Canon P, but perhaps you're experiencing the same as me, the difficulty in moving from a higher magnification finder to a lower one.
That said... I love the ability to use a 28 and 35 without an external viewfinder, and I'm sure I'll get used to it in time. I know why folks hold on to their M3's, though, and I will do the same!
Brian Legge
Veteran
Initially I thought it was a magnification issue too. I'm use to a Canon P or Barnack. Comparing them though is interesting but difficult for me to express. The issue goes beyond simple magnification.
Bright highlights are easy to focus - just as easy or more so than the other two. A dark subject against a white background is different though.
On the barnack, the black line in the on the patch and on the background would have about the same brightness. Its like a 50/50 split. The Canon P is similar, with the On the Canon P the rangefinder patches black line is slightly more translucent. Probably 45/55 compared with the rendering of the backgrounds black line.
On the M4, the black line in the patch is is very light by comparison to the background, much more translucent. Here a comparison between the rendering of the black lines it is more like a 33/66 or 25/75 split where the background black line is much easier to see than the rangefinder patch image. If I cover up the main window so only the patch renders, you can see its darks aren't very dark. On the range 0-255, the darkest part of the patches image is probably only 128 or so if that makes sense. With lower contrast scenes, the reduced brightness of the patch becomes harder to focus.
Like I said though, if I look at something bright like a light, the M4 is just as easy to focus as the others and is very contrasty. Its only lower contrast situations where it doesn't seem as strong. I haven't compared it against another M4 but I'm starting to think it may just be a difference in finder design.
Bright highlights are easy to focus - just as easy or more so than the other two. A dark subject against a white background is different though.
On the barnack, the black line in the on the patch and on the background would have about the same brightness. Its like a 50/50 split. The Canon P is similar, with the On the Canon P the rangefinder patches black line is slightly more translucent. Probably 45/55 compared with the rendering of the backgrounds black line.
On the M4, the black line in the patch is is very light by comparison to the background, much more translucent. Here a comparison between the rendering of the black lines it is more like a 33/66 or 25/75 split where the background black line is much easier to see than the rangefinder patch image. If I cover up the main window so only the patch renders, you can see its darks aren't very dark. On the range 0-255, the darkest part of the patches image is probably only 128 or so if that makes sense. With lower contrast scenes, the reduced brightness of the patch becomes harder to focus.
Like I said though, if I look at something bright like a light, the M4 is just as easy to focus as the others and is very contrasty. Its only lower contrast situations where it doesn't seem as strong. I haven't compared it against another M4 but I'm starting to think it may just be a difference in finder design.
Last edited:
darkness2505
Member
I had a M3 which was not used for maybe 10+ years and there was absolutely no contrast (unusable) in the patch at all (I made a thread about it previously regarding the issue as well). I sent it to Youxin to see if anything can be done to it, and he told me it just needs to be cleaned up. And indeed, the patch is contrasty now and totally usable. Perhaps it just needs another CLA?
ferider
Veteran
1) make sure the little RF window in the front is clean. I can make a big difference (also, it's easy to shade it with finger, etc, which will reduce contrast.
2) in contrast to your Barnack and P, the M4 has a well defined patch boundary. Use that for focusing, not the overlay of two lines in the patch but the break of a line across the patch boundary. Hope that makes sense.
That being said, I have used Barnack and Canon P and find my 0.72 Leicas easier to focus. Not sure if it's the contrast though, or the different method (see 2).
Roland.
2) in contrast to your Barnack and P, the M4 has a well defined patch boundary. Use that for focusing, not the overlay of two lines in the patch but the break of a line across the patch boundary. Hope that makes sense.
That being said, I have used Barnack and Canon P and find my 0.72 Leicas easier to focus. Not sure if it's the contrast though, or the different method (see 2).
Roland.
brokencivilian
Established
I have two m6's and I find that a cla.. even just for a cleaning.. greatly improves the patch. (my one m6 got cla'd but my ttl did not..)
loplop
Member
I just got my M4P back from Youxin... And I must report, the patch is MUCH brighter now. I'll see how I get along vs. my M3, but I'm kinda surprised how nice it is. You may try another CLA, specifically stating that you'd like patch contrast improved.
t.s.k.
Hooked on philm
Does it have 28/75mm lines or is 35mm the widest you can go?
I'm wondering if your M4 has been "updated" to the M6 (M4-P) RF and what you may be seeing is a bit of flare. Otherwise I'm stumped.
I'm wondering if your M4 has been "updated" to the M6 (M4-P) RF and what you may be seeing is a bit of flare. Otherwise I'm stumped.
Brian Legge
Veteran
Thanks all for the recommendations. I'll try to track down another m4 or two for comparison and consider a CLA if there is a big difference.
Mine is the original M4 finder - 35/135 framelines.
Mine is the original M4 finder - 35/135 framelines.