M6 'flare'

[plasticman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After much discussion in another thread I spent some time today trying to get my M6TTL finder to flare. Have to say I failed totally with natural light, indoors or outdoors.

But after I was done with work, I sat down at my kids' desk where they have a very bright, directable LED spot lamp, and worked the camera to get it to flare.

After about 5 minutes, adjusting the angle of the spotlight over the front of the camera and moving it back and forth I finally managed to get some flare! At first just part of the patch, but then with a lot of effort I could get what people seem to call "total whiteout"!

Here's the critical part though: I could adjust the position of my eye by a nano-micrometer* - and the patch was totally clear again!

What a complete anticlimax.

* I think I just made-up this measure. 

[Advertisement]

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

[ktmrider2]

Some users find it objectionable and some don't.  A small condenser lens was removed from the viewfinder with the introduction of the M4-2 as a cost cutting measure by Leica.  It shows up in the M4-2, M4-P, M6, M6TTL and M7 but was put back into the MP and MA.  I just saw a you tube video which stated that the replacement of the condenser during a CLA was $150 by Red Dot Camera in Oregon. 

Again, it bothers some and not others.  I owned all of the above cameras except the MP and while noticeable it never caused me to sell the camera or want to spend money to fix the problem.  I suspect that most Leica owners want their camera to be perfect.  That is why we pay $$$$ for fairly old film cameras.  If it does not bother you and you can ignore it, do!  Enjoy the camera, I do.

[250swb]

I've said before 'just move your eye a fraction' but you know there are some people who just can't do that because why should they make an effort.

[plasticman]

31 minutes ago, 250swb said:

I've said before 'just move your eye a fraction' but you know there are some people who just can't do that because why should they make an effort.

Ah I'm not gonna get into it - I know it's a religious schism so we're probably not allowed to discuss it according to the forum rules, but I certainly expected more than this. In fact, it's probably happened to me before, but because I had no idea this was the legendary flare 'problem' it's never bothered me in the slightest - just the tiniest, tiniest re-position of the eye in relation to the patch fixes it.

Anyways, I respect that it bothers some people. But I think you have to know it's a problem, before you think it's a problem.

[Jon Warwick]

6 minutes ago, plasticman said:

Anyways, I respect that it bothers some people. But I think you have to know it's a problem, before you think it's a problem.

I'm in that camp, I found my early M7 was fine for use for years, but now all I see is the flare on a frequent basis.

But this could do a lot with my eyes needing more help than 15-20 years ago, but particularly also because I owned an M240, where the flare was non-existent and I found focusing on the M240 much much easier and more accurate than the M7.

The other thing is .....after 20 years of owning the M7, can the viewfinder windows start to discolor slightly, ie, they seem a bit darker and/or a bit yellow?

Also, do the newer MP and MA cameras have more pronounced anti-reflection "blue" glass in their viewfinders than the M6/M7? Maybe that helps?

 

[wlaidlaw]

Leica Goodies make a filter which fits over the frame illumination window, which does help with flare but I have found they tend to fall off and get lost, so I have given up with them http://www.leicagoodies.com/shade.html. The worst flare was on my M4-P but it is a lot better with a new combiner that Alan Starkie put in. My M7 was upgraded to the MP spec at Solms VF but still can suffer from a bit of flare. The cataract replacement lens in my left eye, needs a laser ablation spring clean to get rid of some cell growth at the back of the lens and as I am a left eye shooter, some of the flare will be inside my eye. Hopefully having this done next week. 

Wilson

[M9reno]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Viewfinder flare?  I always assumed it was the "Leica Glow".

[TomB_tx]

After starting with my M4 in 1968, I added an M6 in 1985. While I probably noticed the white-out RF in a few cases, I never gave it much thought, as I could work around it. After several years the camera developed problems due to battery leakage in storage, and I was too busy with family to mess with it, so I used my M4 and R cameras. Some 10 years ago I had the M6 serviced, and with my aging eyes the RF flare began to bother me more, especially compared to my M9 and various M2 through M5 cameras I collected in retirement. So it was in comparison to flare-free models that it became an issue for me. I had DAG upgrade both the "flare fix" and change to multi-coated windows, and now it is about the best RF/finder of the lot. I do find the M10 finder the best of the Ms - but the Zeiss Ikon ZM even beats it. Now if Zeiss & Cosina would only make a digital version...

[wlaidlaw]

28 minutes ago, TomB_tx said:

. Now if Zeiss & Cosina would only make a digital version...

Sadly the G3D under consideration by Kyocera, got caught up in the acrimonious parting of the ways with Zeiss. How good it would have been is another matter, as it would most likely have used a similar Dalsa/Philips full frame sensor, developed for industrial process quality control rather than primarily photography. Kyocera said its problems in the N-D were just software/firmware development issues but given how bad the one I had on beta testing, with the later beta firmware, was at anything other than ISO 50, I am not so sure. I had a number of conversations with the outside consultant who wrote the look-up tables and compression protocols for the N-D and he felt they had just chosen the wrong sensor and should have gone for a Kodak one, a lower MP predecessor of the sensor later used in the DCS-14. 

Wilson

[Danner]

M6 Classic shooter here.  Never had a real problem with finder flare.

[BradS]

I have and use the M2, M4-P and M6. I've never had a a finder flare issue with any of these - ever. Like to OP, I even tried to make the M6 finder flare. Never did see any issue. Same with the M4-P. Like I said in the other thread, it seems like the viewfinder flare “issue” is much more prevalent on the internet discussion groups than in real life usage.

[arichter]

Just like an internet discussion can make the M6 rangefinder patch flare a huge issue another group of people can easily get together and come to a conclusion that this issue doesn't exist at all. In my view some people could experience this flare because of the way they use the camera, how they position their eye, what kind of lighting they prefer. When I had an M6 I was annoyed by the flare, especially shooting window lit portraits when light comes from a side. I for one appreciate that Leica improved the viewfinder, shooting now an M7 with MP viewfinder.

Edited February 11, 2021 by arichter

[harmen]

It’s rare to not be able to focus, but there is a real difference in clarity most of the time.  That makes it a factor in the joy of usage; not an issue in being able to use it.

[hilm3]

I've had my M7 since 2009 and in 2011, I sent it in for the optical sensor update. I decided to have Leica put in the MP finder. Until then, the viewfinder flared occasionally. Often, it was easy to correct by moving my eye a nanometer, (the proper technical term is "teeny, tiny fraction of a hair on a gnats", well you know) but as with my M6 I've owned since 1995, it would flare when I was hunting focus on a moving subject, sometimes at the worst time. So when in 2017 the M6 needed a repair, I sent it to Mr. Ye and had the MP finder installed. No regrets. (A nanometer is 1/1000 of a micron which is 1/1000 of a millimeter. An eyelash is about 100,000 nanometers in diameter. Give or take.)

Edited February 16, 2021 by hilm3
measurements

[otto.f]

Do you wear glasses?