M8 Framing Lines

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sorry, but this isn't accurate. Even in the pre-M6 cameras the framelines never showed the coverage at a distance greater than 1 meter. In post M6 cameras they show considerably less.

Thanks. You may be right, but I'm quoting what I'm told by Leica.

 

I know my M4, M5, M6 all seem to have the same coverage. Since I don't have M6TTL or M7, I can't comment on their frameline coverage.

 

But when I raised the question of M8 changes with Leica US, they checked with Leica Germany for clarity and forwarded the response to me. Finder frames for all pre-M8 cameras were set for 2 m distance according to that memo.

 

And remember, since Leica has now set the framelines for accuracy at 70 cm, your argument would be strengthened by the reduction from 2 m to 70 cm rather than the reduction from 1 m to 70 cm.

 

I'd be quite interested in a source for your information. I had never heard before that the M6TTL had a different coverage from that of the M4, say.

 

--HC

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[sean_reid]

In the end it comes down to designing the frame lines around an imaginary scenario: given lens "X" (since not all lenses of the same nominal focal length are of the same actual focal length) focused at distance "Y". If the M8 were designed just for me, the frame lines would be optimized for about a 5 foot focus distance, but that wouldn't necessarily be best for Joe or Sally, etc.

 

Someone above made an important point which is that newer Leica lenses can focus closer than older Leica lenses (speaking generally) and so Leica has shifted the "Y" to .7 meters. I don't often shoot that close but I can understand their reasoning in doing that. For the past twenty+ years, however, I have always made my own estimations about framing when working with rangefinders -- always learned how far outside the frame lines the edges of the picture would actually fall. It's second nature to me now and its there even when I'm working very quickly. Selfishly, I'd love to see the frame lines optimized for a further focus distance but considering all the different people and uses that might be involved with the M8, I can see why Leica did what they did.

 

The frame lines are fairly accurate but only when the camera is set close to the minimum focus distances of lenses like the 24/2.8 asph, 21/2.8 Asph, etc.

 

I discussed all of this in my first M8 review but the above is a condensed version for those who haven't read that article. Accuracy, per se, is not exactly the bone of contention. The debate is really over at what distance these frame lines should be accurate. The frame lines haven't gotten more or less accurate, the target focus distance just shifted.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[thrid]

Like Howard, I have also read that for the M8, the framelines have been designed to be accurate at the closest focus distance. The new philosophy is that you should never get less than you think you will get using the lines. This means that they are significantly less accurate at distance.

 

And that exactly is the problem. You are perfectly fine close-up, but I bet 80-90% of almost everyones shots are taken at distances between 3 and 20 meters and at infinity adn that's where the trouble starts.

 

What Leica is doing makes perfect sense. They are showing you the absolute minimum that you will end up with on the neg or CCD.

 

But the problem is that as the average close focusing distance shrank from 1 meter to .7 and (less for some of the very wides), they increased the margain of error at the distances where most shooting is done. So, the operation was a success, but the patient is dead. The error has always been there, it just wasn't as big and noticeable, when the markings were bigger.

 

The only real solution is to redesign the rangefinder to compensate not only for parallax in X and Y (which it already does), but also for distance (Z) by growing or shrinking the size of the framelines as you focus from up close to infinity. It's been done in other RF cameras, so it's not impossible.

 

Or Leica could offer a set of old style, larger markings for those who want them.

Personally this would be my choice and I would simple frame a hair tighter when shooting really close up. This is a lot easier to do than trying to compensate at medium distances when you are doing fast moving street or documentary photography.

 

Or they could have double markings for each focal length. Maybe additional corners that indicated coverage at infinity, but it's pretty cluttered in there already.

[thrid]

I'd be quite interested in a source for your information. I had never heard before that the M6TTL had a different coverage from that of the M4, say.

 

--HC

 

I own several M bodies (M2/M4/M4-2/M6ttl/M7). If you look through the older bodies and compare the size of the 50mm markings to an M6 or M7, the difference is quite obvious.

 

Back at my old job we had a grid (1ft squares) that coverd a wall of the sound stage. I shot a bunch of tests and it checks out.

 

I also spoke extensively about this with Don Goldberg (DAG) and Sherry at Golden Touch and they both confirmed my findings.

 

If I remember correctly the manuals for the various cameras also provide this information.

 

My dream M is an modern MP or M7 with M4 framelines. ;-)

 

 

cheers.

[sean_reid]

If, at some point, Leica does something like an "M8 a la carte" program, perhaps frame lines optimized for a further focus distance could be an option along with alternate finder magnifications.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[thrid]

If, at some point, Leica does something like an "M8 a la carte" program, perhaps frame lines optimized for a further focus distance could be an option along with alternate finder magnifications.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

I would be first in line to have my M6ttl and M7 'downgraded'.

 

I've heard a rumor that the MP3 has the old size 35/50/90/135 markings, but at $4500 it's a little too steep for my taste. If there is any truth to this, perhaps someone like Sherry could install the MP3 frameline mask in an MP or M7. Maybe even in the M8, although you would lose the 24mm markings.