A few questions about how to make it easier to shoot with my M2 and 35mm Summaron, while wearing eyeglasses

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

When I was a kid, after using Contax and Nikon RF cameras, I bought a Leica M2, and everything seemed great.  60 years later, in addition to my other cameras, I sent my M3 off to Don at DAG Cameras, who made it like new.  I haven't had a chance to try it yet (too much rain), but I already know I'm going to love it, especially the viewfinder.  Anyway, for these past 60 years I've also had another M2 sitting around, which also needs a C&A from DAG Cameras, and a lot of Don's love, but Don suggested I wait until early next year to send it in.  So I decided to shoot with it as-is it for a while.  I've already tested it, and while I know it needs a cleaning, it still captures good images.

When I was young, the only lens I had (read - could afford) was my 50 Summicron.  For a "walkabout" lens now, I was thinking a 35 might be better for me much of the time - but then there's an issue of not being able to see the full 35mm field of view that the M2 provides while I'm wearing my eyeglasses.  

Best solution - remove my glasses.  Works fine, but I'm so used to always wearing progressive lenses that this feels uncomfortable.  I bought one of those "glasses holders" that has a strap that wraps around my neck.  This is most likely what I'll eventually use for the M2.  

I also found an ancient 35mm viewfinder made by Canon that adjusts for parallax, but it was so old and dirty I couldn't see through it.  After half an hour of cleaning, it's now quite useable.  Unfortunately, it too wants to be close-up friends with my eye, meaning my glasses should come off.

This is not a big issue in any way - I'll muddle my way through it, and find what seems to work best for me, but on a hunch I decided to post this. question in the forum, as I imagine lots of others have the same concern.  So, if I'm right about this, do any of you have a good suggestion on how to combine 35mm lens + M2 + eyeglasses to work most conveniently?

 

As a side question, I mounted my very old 35mm Summaron to the M2, expecting it to actuate the 35mm frame lines, but my M2 displays the 50mm frame lines.  I have no idea how good this lens is, but I very much like how compact it is.  Is there anything I'm missing, or does the lens (or camera) need something adjusted?

And while I'm asking, I also ordered a $280 "China-Cron" f/2 lens from KEH.  From the reviews, it has flaws, but for only $280 new that is to be expected I guess.  I'm likely going to be returning it, but using the camera as a "walkabout" camera at night, taking street photos, f/2 sounds better than f/3.5.  Has anybody had any experience with what I'm calling a "China-Cron"?

https://www.keh.com/shop/7artisans-35mm-f-2-manual-lens-for-leica-m-mount-silver-43.html

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[nitroplait]

Ask Don if he can install one of those M6 rubber oculars on your M2. That allows you to press your glasses against the camera without fear of scratching them.

I also use glasses and can't comfortably see the edges of the 35 frame lines on my M6 and M2, but I am so familiar with the angle of view that is doesn't matter. For 100% accurate framing I'd use a Nikon F2 or F3HP (the latter have great eye relief and operate as smoothly as a Leica BTW).

Edited November 19, 2021 by nitroplait

[spydrxx]

Went thru that exercise with my M4 years ago, glasses on or glasses off, switch to contacts, try a diopter, etc. Frustrating to say the least.My unsolicited advice...if you're comfortable wearing glasses, make sure your prescription is up to date...things work so much better then. Next, on the M2, forget the framelines, they're only approximates anyway, just use the entire viewfinder space...if you're fussy about not wanting to crop slightly, then for a while manually select the 35mm framelines until you're comfortable with what's in the pic and what's out.  I hate goggled lenses and long ago sold off all of mine, so now everything I have brings up the proper framelines. Now go and enjoy your camera. (BTW I hated the M6 when I had one, IMHO too much clutter and I found the metering and diodes unsatisfactory).

[Sailronin]

Hi,

I'm going through a similar "learning" process as this is the first time I've worn glasses so surprised at how much they impact the coverage in the viewfinder.  So far with longer lenses (50mm plus) I leave glasses in place and shorter lenses remove the glasses as focus is less critical at shorter focal lengths.  This is not really convenient but short of contacts I can't think of another solution.  Getting old's a bitch, but it does beat the alternative.

Edited November 19, 2021 by Sailronin

[MikeMyers]

53 minutes ago, nitroplait said:

Ask Don if he can install one of those M6 rubber oculars on your M2. That allows you to press your glasses against the camera without fear of scratching them.

I also use glasses and can't comfortably see the edges of the 35 frame lines on my M6 and M2, but I am so familiar with the angle of view that is doesn't matter. For 100% accurate framing I'd use a Nikon F2 or F3HP (the latter have great eye relief and operate as smoothly as a Leica BTW).

I already ordered a pair of those rubber rings that goes around the eyepiece on an M camera.  They're inexpensive, they come from overseas, and they're "adequate" to prevent scratching my glasses.  Don put one of the type he sells on my M3 that he just worked on, and it is SO much nicer, a bit larger, softer, smoother....     I will be writing him in the next few minutes to send me one for my M2.

I've also got a Nikon F2, and an F4, and either would work fine for me, but I expect I'll mostly be using the M3 or (eventually) the M2.  Comparing a Leica M to a Nikon F4 is like comparing a sports car to a truck - and while I doubt I'll ever use the F2 again, I still enjoy using the F4 - despite the huge size and weight.

 

58 minutes ago, spydrxx said:

My unsolicited advice...if you're comfortable wearing glasses, make sure your prescription is up to date...things work so much better then. Next, on the M2, forget the framelines, they're only approximates anyway, just use the entire viewfinder space..

I think my prescription is up to date - will find out for sure this coming Monday.  As to ignoring the frame lines, I suspect that is exactly what I'll be doing with a 35 lens on the M2.  Anything in the viewfinder ought to be on the negative - and if I'm taking photos where this is important, I probably won't be using the M2.

 

50 minutes ago, Sailronin said:

surprised at how much they impact the coverage in the viewfinder.

I've mostly gotten used to this by now in my M8.2 and M10, and with the M10 I can always view the image on the rear screen if I need to be careful.  I guess years ago I just accepted the limitations and worked with them.  I guess my eyes were also more "forgiving" back then.  Having had cataract surgery, my eyes no longer can adjust their focus like they used to.

[Jeff S]

Work with a good optician to find thinner, more flexible frames and scratch resistant lenses.

Heff

[mikemgb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have worn glasses almost my entire life and can sympathize! To see the 35mm frame lines on my M2 I just have to press my glasses to the viewfinder, I use the rubber rings on the viewfinder to prevent scratches. 
 

I also recently bought a 28mm, using that is definitely a challenge without an external finder but I have got used to it, after a while you learn how much extra, above what you can easily see in the viewfinder, will be included in the final image. 
 

As to the China-cron, I have the same lens in black, while it may not me as sharp as a Leica-cron there isn’t much in it, I’m sure you’ll be happy with the images it produces. 

[madNbad]

If you ordered an eyepiece protector from "Jack the Hat" they're very good. I've used the ones from DAG, which are also good, I just like these better. If you're wearing progressive lenses make sure you are using the distance part of your eye glass lens. I wear trifocals but have a second pair that a just bifocal for a larger distance area. I use those mostly with my Kodak Retina IIa because of it's tiny viewfinder. Learn the trick of moving your eye around the edges of the viewfinder. I used a 28 Elmarit on a M2 and never felt the need for an external finder. I have really poor vision plus several other eye problems but the rangefinders help me nail the focus. The real challenge will be the Nikkor 55 1.2 and my Nikkormat FS which only has the central prism.

[MikeMyers]

I asked Don (from DAG) about why the 35mm Summilux f/3.5 brings up the wrong frame lines.  That lens was developed in 1949 or so, then updated to M mount for the Leica M3, but at the time there was no Leica with a 35mm viewfinder, so my lens just brings up the 50mm frame lines.  Don can fix this, but after reading a fascinating article about this lens, it's unlikely to become my go-to lens for 35mm.

Article:  https://vintage-camera-lenses.com/leica-summaron-35mm-f3-5/

After reading all that, I've decided to try and create the "artistic" images this lens is so good for.

I'm getting another rubber viewfinder "ring" from Don; the one he put on my M3 is much better than the inexpensive ones I got from overseas.

Unlike the M2, the viewfinder on my M3 works quite well when I'm wearing my glasses, and is even better if I take my glasses off.  The field of view is so large, going back to the M2 isn't as comfortable for me.

8 hours ago, madNbad said:

If you're wearing progressive lenses make sure you are using the distance part of your eye glass lens.

The way I had my progressive lenses set up, is when I look straight ahead, I always am looking through the "distance" prescription.  To see closer, I need to look lower, but not by moving my head.  It took some time to get used to them.  I had them coated to protect them, and so far after almost two years, they're doing fine.   (Unfortunately they are terrible with my M10 if I try to read the menus or use the on-screen display - I can't focus that close.  I've got another pair that was made to work with digital cameras, so I can easily switch between "infinity" and the LCD screen several inches in front of me.)

I've gotten "rusty".  Growing up, all I had was rangefinder cameras, and everything was so intuitive.  

[oldwino]

Don (DAG) also sells a larger viewfinder aperture frame, 20% larger than the stock aperture. The one they used on the M4 and beyond. I have that in my M2, and it's nice. But it requires removal of the top plate to install. 

 

https://www.dagcamera.com/store/p111/Aperture_for_M2_Rangefinder%2C_20%_larger-_just_like_M4.-.html

[PFM]

I shoot without my glasses because they have a self tinting feature that throws off my estimation for exposure, and Don was glad to modify a Nikon -2 to fit the M viewfinder ring. 

PF

[plaidshirts]

I feel your pain. I have a two 35mm lenses for my M2: an Elmar f3.5 and a Summaron f2.8 with goggles. The Summaron brings up the 50mm frame lines so I’m not straining but the bulkiness is a bit off putting. Can’t beat the compactness of the Elmar but there’s that thing with not being able to see the entire field. There is no perfect solution I’m afraid, unless you get an M with a .58 VF. 

Edited November 20, 2021 by plaidshirts

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Mike,

Early 35mm f3.5 Summarons which never had goggles, like yours, bring up the 50mm frame lines in whichever "M" camera that they are used on. Because at the time of their manufacture there was not an M2 yet.

Designing the lens mount to "key" the 50mm frame allowed the range/viewfinder image to be the entire M3 viewfinder when focusing. And then a person could see the actual field by using a separate SBLOO viewfinder.

To "key" the 35mm frame on an M3 would bring up the 135mm frame lines.

When the M2 was released Leitz redesigned the mount to "key" the 35mm frame. Since there was no 135mm frame line set on an M2.

Best Regards,

Michael

Edited November 20, 2021 by Michael Geschlecht

[MikeMyers]

@Michael Geschlecht- thanks.  I'm now beginning to understand all this, and it even makes sense to me.  I've never seen a set of "Goggles", but I've read about them.  In the past, all this seems brilliant, but in today's SLR/DSLR world, it all sounds like ancient history - which it is!  

When I was a kid, I only had one lens, a 50mm Summicron.  I never thought using it on my shiny new M2 was anything "special" - it just worked.  Then I got glasses, and just accepted the "problem" without even recognizing it as a problem.  All this vanished when I bought my first SLR of course. 

My current philosophy, as others have mentioned, is to mostly ignore the frame lines on my M2 - if I can see something anywhere in the viewfinder, my 35mm photos will be fine, and seeing the 50mm frame lines was no issue for me.  If I was buying a new M-whatever for film, this might be more of a limitation than I want to deal with, but on the old M2, I just accept it. To me, frame lines now seem more like a "guide" than the edges of my in-camera image, unlike a sir/dslr where they are much more precise.

[MikeMyers]

I did some more inspecting, and took some sample photos, and the lens is useless unless/until I get the inside of the lens cleaned, or do it myself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Tvm4wQRX2o

Apparently it's still worth a lot of money as a collector's item, but it's useless right now for actually taking photos using it.  Thank you to everyone for all the feedback, I now know much more about it than ever dreamed of knowing.  Part of me wants to order the tools, and another part of me wants to ask my local camera shop what they would charge for cleaning.  Even for the images I captured that avoided the flare, I didn't see anything very exciting about them.  Watch the (long) video to see what's involved.  I have all the tools in my Amazon shopping cart - I just need to make a decision on what to do.