A miller Posted June 2, 2013 Share #1 Posted June 2, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Do the "tits" in the viewfinder, the top of which indicating the range within focus at f16 and the bottom indicating the range within focus at f5.6, only apply to a 50mm lens? Or, do the "tits" adjust with the frame-lines as different focal length lenses are attached? My guess is the latter but I haven't performed a controlled experiment to find out and thought I'd try a shortcut by asking here. Thanks in advance, Adam Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 2, 2013 Posted June 2, 2013 Hi A miller, Take a look here Question about M3 "tits" in the viewfinder. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Michael Geschlecht Posted June 2, 2013 Share #2 Posted June 2, 2013 Hello Adam, The "notches" in the rangefinder patch are for any 50mm lens. With a shorter focal length they represent a larger F stop top & bottom. With a longer focal length they represent smaller lens openings top & bottom. I have never seen anything from Leitz correlating them with anything other than a 50mm lens. You might try measuring for yourself if you have a specific focal length or specific focal lengths in mind. When I went to do this with other focal lengths years ago I realized that, for me, it wasn't worth the bother. Best Regards, Michael Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted June 2, 2013 Share #3 Posted June 2, 2013 The notches are found on an M2, certainly. I didn't think the M3 had them..? Sent from another Galaxy Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted June 2, 2013 Author Share #4 Posted June 2, 2013 Thanks, Michael and Bill. Michael - This confirms my theory that as a practical matter they are useful (if at all) only one a 50mm. Bill - I can confirm that my M3 indeed has tits. Could be that I have a female version. I have no idea if there is a male version. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted June 2, 2013 Share #5 Posted June 2, 2013 (edited) Hello Bill & Adam, Early M3's don't have them. Later, when the M2 was released with them, they also began to appear in M3's. Best Regards, Michael Edited June 2, 2013 by Michael Geschlecht Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted June 2, 2013 Author Share #6 Posted June 2, 2013 Hi Michael, that's very interesting, thanks. Mine has a 1.1M serial # so that would make sense. It is a fascinating piece of engineering and design. I just am curious as to why it wasn't continued in later models (beyond the M2).... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted June 2, 2013 Share #7 Posted June 2, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...It is a fascinating piece of engineering and design. I just am curious as to why it wasn't continued in later models (beyond the M2).... I'm with you on that... I actually use it on my M2. Regards, Bill Sent from another Galaxy 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted June 2, 2013 Share #8 Posted June 2, 2013 I find that they're so small as to be practically useless. I know from experience (or by using the scale on the lens barrel) roughly how much dof I have to play with. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted June 2, 2013 Author Share #9 Posted June 2, 2013 Hi Earl - thanks for your comment. The tits are much narrower than the hyperfocal "zone" focusing displayed on the lens itself. This leads me to believe that the tighter range of the tits represent a range of focus that is much sharper than the hyperfocus range that the lens provides. For example, at F16 with a 50mm the lens says that focused at about 20 feet everything between 9 feet or so and infiniti are in reasonably sharp focus. The tits at F16 reflect a much narrower range. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted June 2, 2013 Share #10 Posted June 2, 2013 Can someone explain how they're used? Pete Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted June 2, 2013 Share #11 Posted June 2, 2013 Focus on the desired part of your subject, then shift the view so another part you wish to be sharp is aligned with the square representing the f-stop used. If the overlap of the rangefinder images are no more than the width of that box that area will appear sharp. The smaller one may also be useful in evaluating focus shift, once you test enough to know how much overlap represents the shift as you stop down, the smaller square can be a useful reference. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted June 3, 2013 Author Share #12 Posted June 3, 2013 To further explain, the "tit" that sticks out from the top of the middle of the focus patch is meant to reflect the range within which the image is in sharp focus at f16. The bottom "tit", which sticks out to the bottom of the focus patch, is narrower and is intended to reflect the range within which the image will be in sharp focus using f5.6. At these two select apertures, rather than needing to have the focus patch exactly overlapping, there is a range of non-overlapping tolerance within the width of the big top tit (for f16) and smaller bottom tit (for f5.6) within which the image will still be in sharp focus (as opposed to "reasonably sharp"). A quick example of how this can come in handy. Today I was on a sunny turf field watching my boys play flag football. I had my 50mm lens and M3 and was taking action pictures of them. Rather than simply setting the aperture to F16 (it was very sunny and the bright green turf had a turbo charge effect on the light) and pre-setting the focus ring at just under 20 feet so that everything from 9 or so feet to infinity was in a reasonable focus, I was able to determine that the farthest point in the field that I would ever want to focus was within the range of the top tit. So I was able to tighten the focus range, which should in theory give me sharper results. My guess is that this may have been the type of situation that the Leica engineers had in mind when designing these tits. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted June 4, 2013 Share #13 Posted June 4, 2013 What kind of anatomy has tits at top and bottom In 40 + years of using my M3 I have never used these indicators, Leica lenses have such clear DoF scales I always use them. Gerry Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
payasam Posted June 4, 2013 Share #14 Posted June 4, 2013 Unfortunate choice of word: some would call it sexist. Real tits don't look like the M focus indicators, nor are they similarly placed. Like Gerry, I haven't ever used them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted June 4, 2013 Author Share #15 Posted June 4, 2013 Ken Rockwell apparently coined this phrase http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/m3/buyers-guide.htm Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilTed Posted June 8, 2013 Share #16 Posted June 8, 2013 Ken Rockwell apparently coined this phrase LEICA M3 Buyer's Guide Talking of tits Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted June 9, 2013 Share #17 Posted June 9, 2013 This thread is hilarious. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.