Jump to content

Range finder clarity - IIIc and M3


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just got these two items for evaluation and have a few questions.

I’m entirely new to the IIIc but can relate to the M3 as I own an M7.

I know you will tell me to have them CLA’ed, and I shall do so in due time. 

But I would like to know if the “Ghost” image in the range finder is tough to observe in both of these cameras??  In these they are very faint if I can see them at all, terribly slow and difficult to focus.  In other words, is this normal for these cameras?

I had a slight such problem with my M7 and sent it to Leica US, and the “Ghost” image is now clear and easy to use.

Preben

 

Edited by pridbor
misspelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • pridbor changed the title to Range finder clarity - IIIc and M3

These two

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The rangefinder double image on older Leicas can vary from bright and clear with both images of equal brightness, down to the moving image faded away to invisible. Finding a contrasty vertical line to focus on helps when it is fading away.

A clean and possible replacement of parts should bring it back to normal, but if the rest of the camera is working ok you can probably put up with it. The double image on my CL film camera has faded completely away but I can use it by manually setting the distance.

In the US you have a couple of good repair people you can send them to, as discussed in other topics on the forum.

Edited by Pyrogallol
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, pridbor said:

I just got these two items for evaluation and have a few questions.

I’m entirely new to the IIIc but can relate to the M3 as I own an M7.

I know you will tell me to have them CLA’ed, and I shall do so in due time. 

But I would like to know if the “Ghost” image in the range finder is tough to observe in both of these cameras??  In these they are very faint if I can see them at all, terribly slow and difficult to focus.  In other words, is this normal for these cameras?

I had a slight such problem with my M7 and sent it to Leica US, and the “Ghost” image is now clear and easy to use.

Preben

 

Very common with the c models, I have quite a few of them and less than 50% of them have a decent ‘second image’. You need to get some resilvering done or use an orange filter on the rangefinder. With the M3 the whole view can go dark with age. The view on my 2 M3s Is actually quite good.

Any system that relies on mirrors and prisms is almost bound to suffer the some ravages of time, but there is no way of being sure without checking out individual cameras.

William 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been lucky in several LTM bodies I've acquired, in that the rf images were sharp and contrasty, although the Canon bodies' rfs seemed much less so than the others (Leotax, Nicca, and Leica). So in your case, I'd think if you wanted optimal performance I'd send them off to a reliable US repairperson who ould easily rectify the situation. I had an M4 for about 43 years which had an incredibly bright finder, and my M2, which is awaiting a  CLA, likewise, has a very good, contrasty rf. For fun I tried the orange filter on all, and while it did change the characteristics, I wasn't satisfied with the results. Another trick I learned years ago with other RF bodies which had a loss of contrast was to put a small dot of black  ink or circle of dark tape on the offending window for better contrast.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

An LTM rangefinder in good condition can have an excellent secondary image that's very close in brightness and clarity to the primary image. But as William suggests, it's very common to see a faded image with a randomly chosen body As you have the IIIc on approval, you have to factor in whether you want to pay to have this fixed, which may require anything from a simple clean to replacement or resilvering of the relevant components. If you are having a service done anyway, this might not add too much to the cost of the CLA. On the other hand, it is possible to find LTM bodies that have been serviced in recent years, come with a guarantee, and are ready to use right away (some of the more experienced technicians have long waiting lists to work on these bodies).

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Agree with the above comments from William and the rest. The only thing to add is that the M bodies that I own (or tried) use to have a much more clearly defined patch, but it also can be due to the age and/or the concrete samples that I've handled.

Best wishes,

Augusto

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

LTMs and Ms are different in how the images are "mixed" in rangefinder. While LTMs have halfmirror (beam splitter) glass plate in Ms this is one of the surfaces of 2 cemented prisms. This means that in LTM half-reflecting (silvered) surface has a contact with atmopshere and thus, depending on production time/technology used has tendency to corrode. As well, after removing viewer window the silvered surface may be reached and it was not so rare that when the viewer uimage qualitydegrades some people were trying to "clean" it. Resultt was that it was even worse - silvered surface is/was very soft. Positive thing is that new halfmirrors are available, with hard multicoating producing even better contrast and the cost is cca 15 USD.
Differently in Ms, silvered surface is isolated from air, thus does not degrades, or only minimal. But if the prisms separate then coating is destroyed and replacing either main prism on the whole rangefinder is pretty costly.

So back to the original question - generally Ms have better contrast, but it is possible that some LTM have even better

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Great news for me :) I just ran a roll of film through both these cameras, with, to me, satisfactory results! 

I did use the M7 to set distance on the two cameras as it was too cumbersome to use the range finders in these.

 

On 7/6/2021 at 5:39 AM, TomB_tx said:

Youxin replaced the beam splitter in one of my IIIfs with the new multi coated version, and it made a huge difference.

I understand that one can still get a new beam-splitter for the IIIc so I plan to take that route.

One question though: do they need to remove the body cover when performing a CLA? 

The covers on these cameras are near perfect so I'm wondering if it's necessary?

Thanks

Preben

 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, pridbor said:

do they need to remove the body cover when performing a CLA? 

Absolutely. The CLA person needs access to the full shutter cradle and the gear mechanisms. Similarly they need access to the rangefinder and viewfinder. There is no other way of doing a proper CLA.

William 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, willeica said:

Absolutely. The CLA person needs access to the full shutter cradle and the gear mechanisms. Similarly they need access to the rangefinder and viewfinder. There is no other way of doing a proper CLA.

William 

However, generally the “leather” (vulcanite) cover is left in place - if that is your concern. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TomB_tx said:

However, generally the “leather” (vulcanite) cover is left in place - if that is your concern. 

I agree. Unless there is an issue with screws or other parts over vulcanite there is no need to replace it. Original vulcanite will usually increase the value of a camera for collectors.

William

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, TomB_tx said:

However, generally the “leather” (vulcanite) cover is left in place - if that is your concern. 

That was my concern as the vulcanite is perfect and original.

 

Thanks all for your insight

 

Preben

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...