Wide angle lens on M3?

[raduray]

I know the M3 isn't meant for wider lenses, but I'm wondering how a 35 or 40mm would do. What is the focal length that would fill the frame beyond the frame lines? And would the rangefinder work with the wider lens? For reference, I'm thinking of a Nokton 40mm f/1.4.

I know the M4 is the appropriate body for 35mm, but I like the idea of the .85 viewfinder.

 

[maddoc]

The M3 VF magnification is 0.91x and covers the 40mm focal length perfectly. For 35mm you would either need an external VF or an M3 version of the 35mm Summaron, Summicron, or Summilux.

 

[Godfrey]

... The M3 rangefinder works fine with any M-mount, rf coupled lens. And if you want to use a lens with a wider FoV than the built in finder covers, just get an accessory viewfinder of the appropriate focal length for framing.

G

 

[splitimageview]

I used an M3 with a 35mm for a long time, it was ok for framing, but not anywhere near precise. If you want that stick with SLRs. 😀 The entire viewfinder is much closer to 40mm as @maddoc stated.

Using the entire viewfinder required moving my eyeball around to see the far edges, which created eye strain and discomfort.

 

[38Deardorff]

Use it however you like, but if framing is a concern, go ahead and buy an auxilliary viewfinder

 

[santino]

A 40 works perfectly fine with m3 finder. Just don’t get wider unless you use an auxillary finder.

 

[JBiogon]

The Summaron 35mm f2.8 is an underrated lens, and the version with the M3 goggles is very good value, normally selling for a fair bit less than the non-goggles version (probably because there's less demand for it). The goggles do reduce brightness of the viewfinder a bit, but not hugely. A further benefit is that it gives rangefinder focusing down to 0.65m.

 

[38Deardorff]

The Summaron 35mm f2.8 is an underrated lens, and the version with the M3 goggles is very good value, normally selling for a fair bit less than the non-goggles version (probably because there's less demand for it). The goggles do reduce brightness of the viewfinder a bit, but not hugely. A further benefit is that it gives rangefinder focusing down to 0.65m.

..... it's worth noting that the goggled lenses for the M3 change the weight balance & handling feel of the M3 dramatically.

 

[ellisson]

If you shoot wider than 35 mm, for example with a 21 mm lens (and an external viewfinder), you will likely find spacing between frames to be very narrow - a mm or less. This can make cutting negatives challenging.

 

[ddutchison2]

I'll just "third" the recommendation for the 40mm, fits the native full frame VF perfectly and the Rokkor/Summicron versions are superb lenses

 

[splitimageview]

the goggled lenses for the M3 change the weight balance & handling feel of the M3 dramatically.

I didn't find that to be the case. I anticipated that, but was pleasantly surprised. Goggles certainly take up more space and look rather steampunkish. 😀

 

[ellisson]

I didn't find that to be the case. I anticipated that, but was pleasantly surprised. Goggles certainly take up more space and look rather steampunkish. 😀

Same here. Does not make much of a difference to me and the eye relief is significant: it's like shooting with the 50mm frame lines with some space around the fame lines.

 

[DennisM]

The Summaron 35mm f2.8 is an underrated lens, and the version with the M3 goggles is very good value, normally selling for a fair bit less than the non-goggles version (probably because there's less demand for it). The goggles do reduce brightness of the viewfinder a bit, but not hugely. A further benefit is that it gives rangefinder focusing down to 0.65m.

Agree; I use both the non-goggled and goggled versions. The 35mm Summaron is a superb lens; the goggled version on an M3 is a bit different handling wise, but no big issue at least to me.

 

[38Deardorff]

Agree; I use both the non-goggled and goggled versions. The 35mm Summaron is a superb lens; the goggled version on an M3 is a bit different handling wise, but no big issue at least to me.

+1 on the Summaron 2.8. It's a brilliant lens, & particularly if you happen on an early version LTM/M.

[/url]

 

[JBiogon]

I started this so I felt a responsibility to check into it! Re the point about the goggled Summaron dramatically changing the weight balance and handling feel of the M3: having used this lens extensively on an M3 I had never noticed this. But had I simply overlooked it?
I checked a normally reliable reference and was surprised to find the weight of the goggled Summaron 2.8 listed as 310 g.
I weighed mine and in fact it's about 240g. This aligns with other reliable sources who had actually weighed the lens themselves.
To put this in context, this is pretty much exactly the same as a Summicron 50mm v5 black version.
The next stage of my day's work (!) was to mount each lens on my M3 (which is the later version with the strap lugs mounted slightly forward of centre ).
With the goggled Summaron mounted, the camera hangs almost exactly vertically . With the 50mm Summicron it tips very slightly forward . This is because the weight of the goggles on the Summaron is concentrated near the camera body, so the overall centre of gravity of the lens is nearer the body.
In this sense, my conclusion is that the goggled Summaron is absolutely fine on an M3, and in fact better than some other lenses generally thought of as fairly standard I terms of size and weight.

If by "handling" one includes the action of attaching and removing the lens from the camera, then for sure the goggled lens is a bit different but I don't find it really a negative.

And there's no denying it takes up more room in the camera bag.

Having said all of that, for anyone considering getting a goggled 35mm lens for their M3, I would definitely advise trying it first to see if you like it.
It is a bit of an acquired taste for some. But I think it's one of those things that when seeing or reading about it , without having tried it in the flesh, your initial reaction is "that's a really weird and goofy solution ". But in practice it's actually good.
If you want to use a 35mm lens on an M3, this will always involve a compromise.
But for many who have tried it, the goggled Summaron is the best compromise. That it is also a superb lens, as DennisM and 38Deardorff say, adds to the attraction.

 

[38Deardorff]

I started this so I felt a responsibility to check into it! Re the point about the goggled Summaron dramatically changing the weight balance and handling feel of the M3: having used this lens extensively on an M3 I had never noticed this. But had I simply overlooked it?
I checked a normally reliable reference and was surprised to find the weight of the goggled Summaron 2.8 listed as 310 g.
I weighed mine and in fact it's about 240g. This aligns with other reliable sources who had actually weighed the lens themselves.
To put this in context, this is pretty much exactly the same as a Summicron 50mm v5 black version.
The next stage of my day's work (!) was to mount each lens on my M3 (which is the later version with the strap lugs mounted slightly forward of centre ).
With the goggled Summaron mounted, the camera hangs almost exactly vertically . With the 50mm Summicron it tips very slightly forward . This is because the weight of the goggles on the Summaron is concentrated near the camera body, so the overall centre of gravity of the lens is nearer the body.
In this sense, my conclusion is that the goggled Summaron is absolutely fine on an M3, and in fact better than some other lenses generally thought of as fairly standard I terms of size and weight.

If by "handling" one includes the action of attaching and removing the lens from the camera, then for sure the goggled lens is a bit different but I don't find it really a negative.

And there's no denying it takes up more room in the camera bag.

Having said all of that, for anyone considering getting a goggled 35mm lens for their M3, I would definitely advise trying it first to see if you like it.
It is a bit of an acquired taste for some. But I think it's one of those things that when seeing or reading about it , without having tried it in the flesh, your initial reaction is "that's a really weird and goofy solution ". But in practice it's actually good.
If you want to use a 35mm lens on an M3, this will always involve a compromise.
But for many who have tried it, the goggled Summaron is the best compromise. That it is also a superb lens, as DennisM and 38Deardorff say, adds to the attraction.

Agreed that it's a superb lens in any configuration. My observation about feel/handling/balance is based on having owned one and used it. The lens was in fact my impetus to buy an M2 which has remained one of my sweetheart cameras of all time. As indicated....your mileage/ experience/impressions may vary.....

 

[JBiogon]

Very good, we're all in the Summaron 2.8 fan club !

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I know the M3 isn't meant for wider lenses, but I'm wondering how a 35 or 40mm would do. What is the focal length that would fill the frame beyond the frame lines? And would the rangefinder work with the wider lens? For reference, I'm thinking of a Nokton 40mm f/1.4.

I know the M4 is the appropriate body for 35mm, but I like the idea of the .85 viewfinder.

I used 40mm on M3. Entire VF was kinda close to it.
Goggled version of 35 are for 50mm framelines of M3.
Summaron 35 3.5 goggled used to be not expensive, but in Leica league for rendering on bw film.

 

[wlewisiii]

Honestly, RF framing is so "eh" to begin with that since the built in VF covers 40 well, I'd probably slap a 35 on and call it good.

If I really want precise framing - and sometimes I do - then I use an SLR. But when I'm using a rangefinder, I generally don't worry. In this case, I'd put a 35 on, I might wiggle the camera a bit to make sure nothing strange is on the edges and just go for it.

 

[ellisson]

If you wear glasses, you need to look at the multiple edges when using the full view viewfinder area if you want to be more precise in framing. An advantage of the goggled wide angle 35 mm lenses is not having to do that! Or use an external VF for your wide angle lenses. Or, just take off or push up your glasses for each composition, which I found annoying!