FMB Posted May 10, 2013 Share #1 Posted May 10, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) It's me or someone else has detected an improvement in the contrast of the two patches of the RF? I think it could be caused by the disappearance of the parasit light coming from the ancient window to lit the the old frames of the RF. May be I've said a silly thing.. Francisco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 Hi FMB, Take a look here Lit frames have changed the accuracy of the M(240) RF?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
gpwhite Posted May 10, 2013 Share #2 Posted May 10, 2013 Francisco, I have noted a real improvement in overall OVF contrast and focus accuracy in some past posts. No doubt for me that M240 focuses substantially more accurately than my M9 with all lenses except 135 APO. I asked Leica salesman if RF was different in M/40, and he said only the frameline mechanism had changed. Whatever happened, it is a big improvement for me! Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicashot Posted May 11, 2013 Share #3 Posted May 11, 2013 It's me or someone else has detected an improvement in the contrast of the two patches of the RF? I think it could be caused by the disappearance of the parasit light coming from the ancient window to lit the the old frames of the RF. May be I've said a silly thing.. Francisco. Framing accuracy has changed from 1M to 2M so it has improved a little, but in practice it's very close and not a significant improvement. I did talk about this in my review here: http://kristiandowling.com/blog/2013/5/3/leica-m-typ240-user-review Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted May 11, 2013 Share #4 Posted May 11, 2013 Framing accuracy has changed from 1M to 2M so it has improved a little... But he's talking about contrast and focus accuracy (ability to focus), not framing accuracy. Different issues. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted May 11, 2013 Share #5 Posted May 11, 2013 It's me or someone else has detected an improvement in the contrast of the two patches of the RF? Maybe you just need to clean your previous camera's eye-piece? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted May 11, 2013 Author Share #6 Posted May 11, 2013 Never I've had any problem to focus with the RF, even with Apo-Telyt 135, of course if it is perfectly calibrated (since M3 till M9-P and M), but, with the M, I focus quickly. Francisco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabrimon9 Posted May 11, 2013 Share #7 Posted May 11, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Framing accuracy has changed from 1M to 2M so it has improved a little, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted May 11, 2013 Share #8 Posted May 11, 2013 Framing accuracy has changed from 1M to 2M so it has improved a little, Welcome to the forum. Suggest you first read the relatively few preceding posts. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted May 11, 2013 Author Share #9 Posted May 11, 2013 Thank you Jeff. Peter, what I'm trying to found out is, precisely, if the change of the total system of the frames has possitively influenced in a better vision of both images in coincidence now in my opinion also both brighter than before against their background. Francisco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 11, 2013 Share #10 Posted May 11, 2013 Not sure about the patch but it has never been easier to compose with those LED-lit framelines since the addition of 75mm frame in most M viewfinders. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpwhite Posted May 12, 2013 Share #11 Posted May 12, 2013 Thank you Jeff. Peter, what I'm trying to found out is, precisely, if the change of the total system of the frames has possitively influenced in a better vision of both images in coincidence now in my opinion also both brighter than before against their background. Francisco. I believe the answer is yes, Francisco, although I do not have a technical explanation. I am certain that my M240 focuses accurately with far greater ease and consistency than M9 using tricky lenses (35FLE and Zeiss 85 f/2)... Wide-angle Elmars and 50 APO are easy on both bodies. I also perceived a large contrast improvement in the VF from the first time I picked up my M240. When I asked the Leica Camera rep if the VF had changed in the M240 from M9 (he called to warn me about loose lugs), he answered definitively that the only difference was the frameline system (LED and distance factor). Setting aside the comical post above about cleaning the body's eyepiece, etc., my results suggest something significant has resulted with the frameline mechanism change. I use the same Walter rx eyepiece on both bodies, so the comparisons are well controlled. I am surprised that other M240 shooters besides you and me have not noticed this improvement. One explanation is that I shoot lenses either wide open or one stop down, so my style is more sensitive to focus precision. Perhaps a Noctilux + M240 member will chime in? Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted May 12, 2013 Author Share #12 Posted May 12, 2013 Peter, me again. As you say and because of a problem of shaking of my hands I'm used to put stops wide open to have a little more speed in the shots. (1.4 in Lux 35 and 50, 2 in Cron 90 and with the small Leica tripod even Apo Telyt 135, since I lost my R optics now recuperated). Of course I need to focus well if I want good results. I'm very happy with the new RF. Thank you for your comments, Francisco Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted May 12, 2013 Share #13 Posted May 12, 2013 Francisco ...... I think you are 100% correct. The elimination of the stray light from the illumination window has improved contrast in the optical system in the Rangefinder mechanism. That is probably the critical factor in people finding focussing 'more accurate'. Nothing else has changed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 12, 2013 Share #14 Posted May 12, 2013 The RF has never been so good with those lit frames. Some newbies did expect to use the EVF as a substitute for an outdated focussing system but after a good laugh (or nervous breakdown) at trying to focus the Olyca EVF on faster than snails subject matters, they will end up praising the rangefinder as the greatest invention since sliced bread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted May 12, 2013 Share #15 Posted May 12, 2013 Not sure about the patch but it has never been easier to compose with those LED-lit framelines since the addition of 75mm frame in most M viewfinders. It would be good, given that the M's framelines are electronic, if you could manually switch off the 75 or 50 lines where desired. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 12, 2013 Share #16 Posted May 12, 2013 Would be a dream but the framelines remain mechanical so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted May 12, 2013 Share #17 Posted May 12, 2013 It would be good, given that the M's framelines are electronic... Nope, just a Ict says. But the whole point here is that they are illuminated differently, now electronically illuminated rather than by light through the front window. So maybe no stray light to reduce contrast, but the overall frame line mechanism remains unchanged mechanically. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted May 13, 2013 Author Share #18 Posted May 13, 2013 My M(240) is coming back home, after surgical operations in Solms (hell eyelets), may be today will be here. Summing up, I'm in a discovering phase of details and my first and not very original but fundamental conclusion is LEICA M as a RF camera is the best of all I've had: Silent, smooth, reliable and when you need it, versatile with gadgets to use R lenses or other brands, macro, Telyt, accessories and so on... Many, in this Forum are determined to find a particular defect or deficiency to highlight two questions basically negative, or that "other" camera is much better, cheaper with the same performance, or there is a critic lack or fail unforgivable by an appreciated good photographer. Few, in short, including myself, have followed her story as an instrument, as a whole way of doing photography, satisfying those who have been lifelong supporters of such cameras, with a fantastic set of unbeatable Leica lenses in our bags. Francisco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpwhite Posted May 13, 2013 Share #19 Posted May 13, 2013 My M(240) is coming back home, after surgical operations in Solms (hell eyelets), may be today will be here. Summing up, I'm in a discovering phase of details and my first and not very original but fundamental conclusion is LEICA M as a RF camera is the best of all I've had: Silent, smooth, reliable and when you need it, versatile with gadgets to use R lenses or other brands, macro, Telyt, accessories and so on... Many, in this Forum are determined to find a particular defect or deficiency to highlight two questions basically negative, or that "other" camera is much better, cheaper with the same performance, or there is a critic lack or fail unforgivable by an appreciated good photographer. Few, in short, including myself, have followed her story as an instrument, as a whole way of doing photography, satisfying those who have been lifelong supporters of such cameras, with a fantastic set of unbeatable Leica lenses in our bags. Francisco. Francisco, very well said in all respects! I believe that the level of quetsching will diminish as Leica ships more M240's out into the market, and photogs get to use rather than imagine the camera. I wonder what new lens surprises Leica has in store for the new M? Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted May 13, 2013 Share #20 Posted May 13, 2013 It would have been nice if a button could have been programmed to illuminate both, one, or the other frame-line once a lens is mounted. Then to be automatically reset once the lens is removed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.