M8 Frame Line Accuracy

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, yes, I do agree with you. I don't expect Leica ever expected to see it posted here. In truth, if you take a film-M apart, it's all a bit utilitarian in there; does the job though.

 

Here's a different view and you can see where the silver lever presses against the cam to adjust the angle of the rangefinder (circled). That contact surface worries me - as it wears, it will send the rangefinder adjustment out.

 

Notice here also the brown/orange flex print which are the back of the viewfinder LED display.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[larry]

Interesting how crudely made the rangefinder mechanism looks when opened up (and perhaps viewed at this kind of magnification). Nothing like the beautiful mechanisms you find inside a decent watch.

 

Yes, the rangefinder innards seem more akin to that of a power tool, but considering the wear-and-tear they endure, it's kind of reassuring.

 

Larry

[Advertisement]

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

[JGW]

Uh-oh!

 

My error, and credit where credit is due: I mis-attributed the remark; it was yours in the thread you mentioned above, http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/25682-good-news-leica-about-frame-line.html.

 

Thanks for asking me to prove my assumption!

 

--HC

 

Hi,

This doesn't bother me at all. I was hoping that Guy Mancuso might have been in touch with Leica and have taken this further and found something out for us all. I wish he would. Are you reading this Guy?

JGW

[ho_co]

Interesting how crudely made the rangefinder mechanism looks when opened up (and perhaps viewed at this kind of magnification). Nothing like the beautiful mechanisms you find inside a decent watch.

Ian--good point.

When I attended the US "Leica School" in New Jersey in the 70's, we were shown the M3 finder in class--a stunningly beautiful construction.

 

Later one of the (should I say) 'haughtier than thou' members of the Leica Technical staff commented, "Well, of course, we showed you the M3 rangefinder. There's a reason for that. The M4 finder is quite different." (M4 was current at the time.)

 

I could never extract exactly what he meant, but my impression was along the lines of what you imply: 'We would prefer that you not see the current finder mechanism; that for the M3 leaves a better impression.'

 

 

Mark--

Thanks for posting! A new shot to be added to the Anatomy thread, unless I miss my guess!

 

Can you describe where the frame foils are? I take it they are in the brass-colored housing above the silver cam? (Or in the second shot, adjacent to the brown-orange flexprint and just below the slotted steel screw head?)

 

And I really like the drama that the rust adds to the rangefinder tracking wheel. Or rather, I like the contrast in tone that the tracking roller makes with its carrier. (What, me, snide?)

 

--HC

[ho_co]

... I was hoping that Guy Mancuso might have been in touch with Leica and have taken this further and found something out for us all. I wish he would. Are you reading this Guy?

Yes, Guy! Are you reading this?

 

--HC

[marknorton]

Thanks for posting! A new shot to be added to the Anatomy thread, unless I miss my guess!

 

Can you describe where the frame foils are? I take it they are in the brass-colored housing above the silver cam? (Or in the second shot, adjacent to the brown-orange flexprint and just below the slotted steel screw head?)

 

And I really like the drama that the rust adds to the rangefinder tracking wheel. Or rather, I like the contrast in tone that the tracking roller makes with its carrier. (What, me, snide?)

 

--HC

 

Yes, I was surprised to see the rust - reminds me of an Italian car I one had!

 

The frame foils are mounted on the brass carrier - vertical movement of the pin in the first picture moves one foil relative to another and causes one of the three sets of frames to be exposed. The foils are certainly tiny and makes you wonder how they cut the slots before the days when this sort of thing could be done by laser, by stamping I suppose.

 

The brass plate has slots cut in it which allows it to move diagonally as you focus for parallax correction. Everything moves, the frames, the aperture for the rangefinder patch and the LED display mounted on the back.

 

That's different from the Epson R-D1 where only the frame lines move, the rangefinder patch does not which makes it look distinctly off-centre at closest focus.

 

Working on the finder with the top cover removed is difficult because the lens mounted in the top cover is an integral part of the finder optics - you don't get a clear view if you look through the finder with the top cover removed.

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

By the way, notice the curved mirror on the left hand side of the first picture. That reflects light coming in through the centre window onto the rangefinder frames to illuminate them. The concave shape will concentrate the light onto the frames.

 

The hole in the middle of the mirror is to let the image projected by the the rangefinder optics through onto the frames and the hole must be large enough to prevent the rangefinder image being clipped at each extreme of the rangefinder position.

 

The rangefinder foils are the plane where everything comes into focus for the user viewing through the viewfinder - the frames, the rangefinder patch image and the LED display.

[ho_co]

Mark--

Thanks very much for the explanation. Looks like a combination of elegance and directness.

 

... The foils are certainly tiny and makes you wonder how they cut the slots before the days when this sort of thing could be done by laser, by stamping I suppose. ...

The 90 frame on my M8 apparently has a 'hanging chad'--that is, a piece of metal not completely disconnected from the foil--so they're probably still stamping.

 

 

Well, after the forum brouhaha, I had checked focus and been satisfied. And above I offered an apologia for the fact that we so far have no choice about frameline accuracy.

 

But I've been in denial about my framelines' alignment. I've had the feeling that my frames are fairly well aligned on two sides, but way off on the opposite two. Your photos show that that really is possible, that it isn't just a niggling thought, and that I better check it.

 

Sigh.

 

--HC

[carstenw]

In an attempt to quantify the frameline error, I very carefully lined up the corners of my M8 with 75 Lux at specific architectural points, remembered where they were, and applied them to the final image as red squares, so you can see how wasteful the framelines are for the 75mm focal length. The 50mm framelines are also somewhat wasteful, IIRC, but the 75 is really bad. Note that the actual wall is curved, so the apparent distortion is not really there. The distance was perhaps 30m.

 

.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[marknorton]

Interesting test, Carsten, rough measuring off the screen says you get 35% more width and height than you expect, and a boggling 80% greater area. How in the world did Leica erver think this would be OK?

 

Were you framing on the inside or outside edges of the frame corners?

[carstenw]

Outside. I chose the outside of the frame and matched it to the outside of the columns and the top edge of the top bar, which coincidentally and usefully gave me the bottom of the black stone at the bottom edge.

 

Yep, the 75mm framelines are pretty bad at distance.

[doubice]

 

Yep, the 75mm framelines are pretty bad at distance.

 

Those were my findings as well. I was not using a 75mm lens, but a 1937 vintage 1.9/73mm Hektor (beautiful soft glow!).

 

I have not done as exact a test as Carsten but, it appears to me that the 50mm frame is about what the 73mm takes in...........

 

Best,

 

Jan

[carstenw]

A quick couple of tests shows that for the 75 Lux, the real framelines should be about halfway between where they currently are and the 50 framelines. I will probably do a series of tests at infinity on a tripod with various lenses to show where the framelines should all be.

[DaveEP]

Frame line acuracy is my ONLY real complaint about the M8. If they could fix this for me, I would be an M8 only shooter. As it is, I need to keep my Canon around for some jobs, because framing is important from time to time - especially when you need to maximize the use of the pixels taken (i.e. large blow up).

[sean_reid]

I'd have to test to be sure but I think the M8's 90 mm frame lines may have been set for a distance of one meter rather than .7 meters. (The current Leica 90s don't focus that close anyway). That's just a hunch right now but the 90 frame lines seem, to me, to be more accurate at distance than are those for the 75. I'll ask Leica about this.

 

Of all the frame lines, I find those of the 75 to be the most problematic.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[ho_co]

Great test, Carsten.

 

I was thinking I would try to line up some tape at the locations of the frame lines, but without an assistant that would be rather tedious.

 

Woo Hah! I'm off to look for some monumental structures!

 

--HC

[sean_reid]

because framing is important from time to time - (i.e. large blow up).

 

For me, framing is always important. I can get an internalized sense of my edges with the wide and normal lenses but the 75 is indeed problematic.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[TEBnewyork]

I am brand new to both rangefinders and the M8. Thie weekend I was practicing with the camera. It took me three tries to get this truck out of the picture. Not that I am happy to hear that the frame lines aren't accurate, but I am happy to know that I am not an idiot with the camera. This was with the CV75 Heliar

 

[sean_reid]

I am brand new to both rangefinders and the M8. Thie weekend I was practicing with the camera. It took me three tries to get this truck out of the picture. Not that I am happy to hear that the frame lines aren't accurate, but I am happy to know that I am not an idiot with the camera.

 

 

Parallax also plays a role in that picture's framing. I discuss this frame line issue in my "Introduction to Rangefinder Cameras" article.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Guest guy_mancuso]

LOL yes I am reading this. Hmmmmm. Certainly a topic of conversation but you have to ask this guy first.

 

Honestly the next person that says the M8 sucks , i'm going to let this guy lose. LOL. Oh wrong forum this one is for DP review. ROTFLMAO

 

75mm lux at F5.6

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!