Leica M6 35mm lens - .72 0r .85x

[Captain Kidd]

I recently asked a question about an M6 with a 50mm lens and received some very helpful tips. Ive decided to use a 35mm lens as my prime and only lens.

I'm looking to buy an M6, though Im in Ireland and if only there was a shop I could walk into with some M6's I could solve this myself, but I need the expertise and would really appreciate the opinions of those of you with an M6 who use 35mm lens.

My main and only lens will be a 35mm. And im torn between which viewfinder magnification to get. The .72 or the .85. I don't wear glasses.

I know this question has been asked before and apologies if its a frustrating one, but im leaning towards using the .85 viewfinder. The example I have attached shows space around the lines with a 35mm, though from what I read some people say they need to 'scan' the viewfinder to see the lines, yet in the image it looks like all lines can be seen at the same time and some information outside of the lines, on the .85. Would this be accurate?

I think id prefer the framelines being as large as possible, though as long as I can always see them at the same time, or would this mean my eyeball is squashed against the viewfinder!

People say that the extra space outside the framlines allows you make the compostion better, im not entirely sure this is the case for me, i have generally used cameras where the majority of the viewfinder is what you can expect the picture to be. Though I do understand that it allows you to see what or who might walk into the framelines before they do, though im unsure if that benefit is worth the smaller framelines space.

In short, with a 35mm lens on a .85x M6, viewed without glasses, can you comfortably see the framlines like the attachment suggests?

or is the .72 much more comfortable to use and the framlines in fact take up much more space in the viewfinder than the example suggests, ie your eye doesnt have to be pressed right up to give the impression the framelines take up the majority of the viewfinder.

Thank you for any help,
David

 

[michaelwj]

0.72
It's bigger than the diagram makes it look. Plus they're more common, therefore easier to find, and therefore generally cheaper.
And although you say you don't want the see 'outside' the frame as you've been fine with TTL viewing, I think you'll really appreciate it.
Lastly, stop overthinking it. Get one and use it, if you like it then cool, if you don't then sell it and buy the other. It won't cost you much - these cameras are 20 years old. They've already depreciated!

 

[FrozenInTime]

Save your money - the x0.72 is the best one to start with.
Once you handle a real camera, you will see the brochure frame line pictures are somewhat misrepresentative.
I have both a .72 and. .85 M6 and prefer 35mm on the 0.72; 50mm and 75mm on the .85.

 

[Captain Kidd]

Thanks, though in fairness im not swayed by whether its eaier to find or not, im intending to be stuck with it for a long time, and I dont agree with it not costing much, surely thats completely objective, im looking at €2,300 - 3,000, with a lens. Thats alot from my perspective so unfortunaly I have to over think it. I could buy a car for that.

Thanks for the reply, ideally id love to try one,

 

[Captain Kidd]

Thanks Fronzenintime, the .85 with the 35mm, whats the main issues you have with that combination? too tight, uncomfortable,

Much appreciated

 

[sazerac]

I have a .85 VF and shoot mostly the 50 and 90mm lenses. I like it for those but 35mm is a bit tight but useable. I have borrowed a friend's .72 VF for the 35mm and like it. In fact I don't mind using it with the 50mm on occasion. If you are only going to have a 35mm I'd go with the .72.

 

[Captain Kidd]

Thanks Sazerac, I really appreciate the help with this

 

[a.noctilux]

If you buy a M6 .85, you may have some flare in the focussing patch if it's not upgraded to MP's.

For me .72 is very comfortable with 35mm lens.
I use the .85 one mainly from 50mm up.

Arnaud

 

[13Promet]

In order to see the whole 35mm frame lines in the .85, you need to roll you eye around the VF, which is pretty unconvenient and slows you down.
Go for the .72

 

[Leica All Day]

I shoot mostly with a .72 and 35mm lens and I have no complaints. I totally understand your view on the camera and lens costing 'a lot', I felt the same way when I was first getting into Leica cameras. On another note, I've been shooting with an m6ttl for about 16 years and at one point I ended up buying a 'back up' m6 Classic, I quickly realized that I should of got a 2nd m6ttl, so I sold my m6 classic for about the same price I bought it for and ended up buying another m6ttl.

My point is, these cameras are at a price point now where you really won't lose any money if you happen to change your mind down the road, that said I understand you want to avoid the hassle of going through it.

Good luck on whatever you end up getting, and BTW, you came to the right place for information. RFF is THE BEST !!!!

Cheers, michael

 

[michaelwj]

Thanks, though in fairness im not swayed by whether its eaier to find or not, im intending to be stuck with it for a long time, and I dont agree with it not costing much, surely thats completely objective, im looking at €2,300 - 3,000, with a lens. Thats alot from my perspective so unfortunaly I have to over think it. I could buy a car for that.

Thanks for the reply, ideally id love to try one,

I suppose the gist of my point is that you'll never know until you try both. If you just get one, I think you will always doubt your decision. You're allowed to try one, not like it and move on, but I don't think we can help anymore.

Like I mentioned in one of your earlier threads, 0.72 (or 0.68 now in digital) has been the standard since the M2. It's no accident. 0.72x was introduced for the 35mm frame lines, the 28mm one weren't added for a few decades. If the higher magnification worked better for 35mm, then the M2 would not have gone to the lower mag.

I hope you enjoy what you end up with, and don't forget to post pics of it, and from it!

 

[Captain Kidd]

Thanks everybody, I really appreciate the help, I think it makes sense to go with the .72, 13promet thanks for describing the need to roll your eye around the viewfinder, that doesnt sound appealing.

michaelbialecki, can I ask and I know Im potentially opening another can of worm but why do you prefer the ttl to the classic? and you're right this is an incredibly helpful forum,

Thanks again everyone

 

[Captain Kidd]

Thanks Michaelwj, I really appreciate the feedback, its been a difficult process figuring all this out and I really appreciate your help, and everyone elses. I think the .72 is the way to go.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Actually, there was a third magnification: 0.58, for wide-angle users. However, as you read already, the 0.72 is the best choice when compared to the 0.85. The latter is perfect for long-lens users.

BTW, I have the M6TTL in 0.72 and use wide angle glass (28mm and 35mm), and it's relatively easy to see the framelines and get used to them.

Besides, you'll pay a prime for anything that's NOT a 0.72.

 

[reaperman]

I use a M6 ttl with 0.58 magnification for my 35 mm lenses. There is only one uncluttered frame and for 35mm. It's a joy to use.

 

[Richard G]

The classic Leica of the last generation or so has been an M6 0.72 with a 35 Summicron. If you can't love that you need a Nikon or something.

 

[segedi]

TTL vs classic. Only TTL if you are concerned with age of the body as the TTL version is newer. Or if you intend to use flash a lot.

I have a .85 M7 and agree with the other posters, .72 is better for 35mm. You could always get a 1.25x adapter to make a .9 equivalent magnification if you pick up a 50mm and feel the need.

 

[Leica All Day]

Thanks everybody, I really appreciate the help, I think it makes sense to go with the .72, 13promet thanks for describing the need to roll your eye around the viewfinder, that doesnt sound appealing.

michaelbialecki, can I ask and I know Im potentially opening another can of worm but why do you prefer the ttl to the classic? and you're right this is an incredibly helpful forum,

Thanks again everyone

I prefer the m6ttl because it has a bigger shutter speed dial and I find it easier to turn than the smaller shutter speed dial of the m6 classic ( and m2, m3, m4, etc…).

It also has a slightly different light meter as someone else mentioned already… I will try my best to describe this but I am sure others can probably do better than me.

M6ttl meter > 0 <
M6 classic meter > <

Both meters are accurate, but the m6ttl has a "0" in the middle so when your meter is accurate you see a "0", when the meter on the m6 classic is accurate you see "> <", both diodes are visible. (I hope I didn't just confuse you, lol)

The direction that the "arrows" are on the m6ttl just make more sense to me because that is what I am used to. I put that in bold, because I believe whatever you start off with, you will get used to it, it just so happens that I got my m6ttl first and used it for many years before I got an m6 classic and it was a little difficult for me to use both cameras at the same time. (well, not the exact same time, but you understand what I mean).

I have big hands and I just think the shutter wheel on the m6ttl is easier to turn, and I am used to the way that the meter is, it doesn't mean it is better than the m6 classic, it is just what I am used to.

I hope that helped.

cheers, michael

 

[Captain Kidd]

Thanks Michael, you explained it perfectly and you're right about it generally being about what you're used to. I appreciate all the help everyone.

Thanks again

 

[Captain Kidd]

Actually, just one last thing, I see some Leica shops around Europe have secondhand leicas for sale. They seem to be more expensive but would you agree that its better to buy them from an authorised Leica shop that includes a 1 year guarantee or go for the cheaper alternative on eBay?