Changes of the M3 filmframe?

[UliWer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a  "Leitz Gesamtkatalog für den Fachhandel" (the red loose leaf ring binder) from 1963 in which a former user noted quite a lot of additional information to many items listed in the catalogue in handwriting. It looks as if a salesman had visited a special training at Wetzlar and took notes from the course. 

There is one special note which is unclear to me.

At the margin of the technical descripition of the Leica M3 he wrote "926 701 - Bildfenster 23,8x35,6mm". I understand this as the camera's filmframe had the size of 23.8x35.6mm - but only from serial number 926 701 onwards. So the note seems to imply that the size was changed with this serial number of the M3. 

I looked at "Lager" and "Laney" which list many minor changes for the M3 during its production time - but they don't say anything about the filmframe. When I measure the filmframe of my M3 with a higher number the given mm seem to be right. 

Does anybody - perhaps with an M3 earlier than No. 926701 - know if the filmframe had a different size before (probably smaller)?

Btw: There is another handwritten note in my catalogue for the M3: "959001 - Bildfeldwähler 5° schräg" (frameselector 5° offset). Yes, the selector of my M3 is a little bit offset with a 50mm lens - my be 5° - which I never noticed before. 

[Advertisement]

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

[adan]

6 hours ago, UliWer said:

Does anybody - perhaps with an M3 earlier than No. 926701 - know if the filmframe had a different size before (probably smaller)?

Or larger!

M3 926701 corresponds to 1959, and the introduction of the first 21mm Super-Angulon (f/4). Which, as we know, produces a marginally larger negative due to angle of incidence (the image "leaks" past the edges of the bildfenster more than longer lenses, because those SAs sit so close to the shutter.

Leica may have gotten feedback from what passed for "beta-testers" in 1959 - or figured out for themselves - that the larger images from the 21mm lens would start overlapping unless they decreased the opening a few 10ths of a mm.

And maybe made the same change in introducing the M2 at the same moment.....

Edited February 28, 2021 by adan

[UliWer]

I looked at a film with photos taken with an M2 and the 1:3.4 Super-Angulon. Yes: the black divisions between the single frames a certainly slimmer than with a 35mm lens. With a larger camera frame there might be overlapping. 

Btw: What is the right word for the camera's "Bildfenster" in English? I am not sure about "filmframe". I have the same problem with the "black division between frames" on film. In German it is "Steg" but I don't find a short English word for it.  

 

 

Edited February 28, 2021 by UliWer

[frame-it]

https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/what-are-the-exact-dimensions-of-a-leica-negative.482917/

 

 

 

 

Edited February 28, 2021 by frame-it

[adan]

1 hour ago, UliWer said:

Btw: What is the right word for the camera's "Bildfenster" in English? I am not sure about "filmframe". I have the same problem with the "black division between frames" on film. In German it is "Steg" but I don't find a short English word for it.

For the rectangular opening, I tend to use "film/shutter gate" or "shutter opening" (verschlussöffnung). Although with a leaf-shutter camera, it really has nothing to do with the shutter.  

I knew what you meant, in any case.

For the empty space between frames, I just think "space" or "gap." Some of the UK folks here seem to refer to the "rebate," although that seems to mean the unexposed space all around the exposed film (the black borders), including the sprocket holes and such. And can be confused with the economic meaning of "discounted price" or "money returned."

"I always print the film rebate."

"Ilford is offering a 10% film rebate."

It is always tricky trying to come up with a noun for something that isn't there.

Well, maybe not. Die leere, das nichts, die null, der spalt, das lücke, der raum zwischen.

[Pyrogallol]

I always print the film rebate - but I only call it “rebate” because that seems to be the word used to describe the immediate area of clear unexposed film around the exposed part. It only becomes a “black border” on a print or if we are talking about colour slides.

One reason I like my Nikon S is because the negatives are 24 x 34 not 24 x 36 with a wider gap between them which makes cutting the film into strips of six easier, as I always seem to end up cutting between the best negatives, then the one on the end of the strip is not as easy to print the full “rebate” as the cut end wants to slip out of the enlarger negative carrier, (which has been filed out to allow the rebates to show) and does not have enough rebate to print, if you know what I mean.

Edited February 28, 2021 by Pyrogallol