Leica M6 TTL 0.58 VF Serial Numbers? (Is my .58x really .58x?)

[jaybeuff]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all,

I have an M6 TTL Black Chrome i purchased back in 2013 that is supposedly a 0.58VF.   After getting it back from a CLA from DAG I noticed that the VF has 135mm framelines, which it shouldnt.

After looking online at 0.58x frameline illustrations I am now wondering if I got scammed when purchasing the M6TTL and its actually a 0.72x VF.   
Trouble is, I dont have any 0.72 VF to check against.  I can see the 28mm frameline with glasses on but there is not a ton of room around it by any means.

Is there a 100% verified list of serial numbers for 0.58 viewfinders?  My camera's serial number is in the 27204** range.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?   

[Advertisement]

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

[Huss]

If you can see the 28mm framelines w glasses, it is a .58

I don't think what you think are 135mm frame lines are that.

[jaybeuff]

Just barely I can see them with glasses.  It fully fills the frame.   Without glasses there’s a little bit of space around them.
 

The 135 frame lines are on the 35mm frame lines.  There are no other frame lines on 35mm to my knowledge. 

Edited December 13, 2022 by jaybeuff
Clarity

[logan2z]

Which one of these matches your camera?

0.58

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!

0.72

* Images shamelessly borrowed from Tamarkin's web site

Edited December 13, 2022 by logan2z

[lct]

0.58x M6's have no 135mm frame lines AFAIK but i have no experience with them.

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!

 

[jaybeuff]

Yeah looks way more like .72 than .58.    Such a bummer.   

[madNbad]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The finder magnification is normally marked in the lower left corner of the window on the TTL's. It may not be a .58 but it's still a great camera!

[jaybeuff]

43 minutes ago, madNbad said:

The finder magnification is normally marked in the lower left corner of the window on the TTL's. It may not be a .58 but it's still a great camera!

Yeah it says 0.58 but it’s clearly not.   What sucks is I got cheated hah.  
 

that said is there a registry of serial numbers that I can check for future reference if a camera is what it says it is?

[twogun]

I've never seen or heard of a 0,58x without a marking on the viewfinder window. I had an M6 TTL which clearly had .58x on it. I always assumed that if it didn't say on the viewfinder then it's probably default 0.72x.

[stray cat]

Hi Jay, I own M6TTLs in all three viewfinder configurations and can confirm that there are no framelines for 135mm along with the framelines for 35mm with the .58 viewfinder, however there are on the .72 finder. On the .72 the 28mm framelines are way at the edges of my vision without glasses, and my eye almost has to roam around the frame to get the whole view within those framelines. With the .58 model the 28mm framelines sit comfortably in view with just a little rebate space around them (again, without glasses). As shown in lct's and loganz's graphics above although I'd have put the 28mm framelines a little closer to the edge in the 0.58 illustrations.

Serial-number wise, my 0.58 is 2682*** while the 0.72 is 2592*** Doesn't really help you much but I hope it helps a little.

[Danner]

34 minutes ago, jaybeuff said:

Yeah it says 0.58 but it’s clearly not.   What sucks is I got cheated hah.  
 

that said is there a registry of serial numbers that I can check for future reference if a camera is what it says it is?

Wow, that's rotten.  The .58 finders demand a premium in price, and it looks like somebody swapped the viewfinder window to defraud you.  

[madNbad]

1 hour ago, jaybeuff said:

Yeah it says 0.58 but it’s clearly not.   What sucks is I got cheated hah.  
 

that said is there a registry of serial numbers that I can check for future reference if a camera is what it says it is?

Cameraquest and a couple of other sites have a list of serial numbers and the camera description. I had two TTL’s, a .72 black chrome and a Millennium. Thought they were the most user friendly Leica M. 

[jaybeuff]

2 hours ago, Danner said:

Wow, that's rotten.  The .58 finders demand a premium in price, and it looks like somebody swapped the viewfinder window to defraud you.  

Pretty messed up for someone to do that.  I guess the saving grace is this camera was purchased a few years back when prices on M6TTLs were low.  I think I paid $1,350 for it.  I never owned a .72x vf so I just assumed that 28 framelines on a .72x were even worse.   I hardly used my loved 28mm lens because the framelines were so hard to use without contacts in.

I spoke to DAG and he can swap the mag to 0.58 but its not cheap.   Though with film M6 prices what they are, its still cheaper than selling this otherwise mint camera,  which already has MP coated windows and flare kit installed and fresh overhaul.   Always sucks to know you got scammed though.  The ebay seller is long gone and account dissolved.  Crazy though as they had a really solid rating.  Maybe they were duped as well.  At this point who knows. 

Update:
Looked at my sales receipts via ebay closer and realized their ebay account is gone but they are also a brick and mortar store (and their own webstore) based out of Minnesota (usa).   I was thinking maybe its worth trying to call and see if they would cover cost of the viewfinder replacement from DAG.    Its been a few years, but the receipts clearly say 0.58x viewfinder.

What do you all think? 

Edited December 14, 2022 by jaybeuff

[Huss]

I still think it is a .58 if you can see the 28 frame lines w glasses on.  I have a .58 and .72 and the only one I can see the 28 frame lines w glasses on is the .58

It is impossible to see them w the .72

[jaybeuff]

5 hours ago, twogun said:

I've never seen or heard of a 0,58x without a marking on the viewfinder window. I had an M6 TTL which clearly had .58x on it. I always assumed that if it didn't say on the viewfinder then it's probably default 0.72x.

If I mash my face and glasses hard into it I can just make out the lines. Zero space around them.   If I take off glasses and do the same I’ve got a small sliver of space around them.

 

If looking normally with glasses I can only see if I’m moving my camera around fishing to see them and not really all at once.  Idk looks like 0.72 to me.  When I looked at the new Leica M6 0.72 it looked the same as mine to my eyes but maybe I need to look again.

Also I found this serial number chart on l-camera-forum's wiki: M6 TTL - Leica Wiki (English) (l-camera-forum.com)
Now check this out.   Red is 0.58 serial numbers.   Blue is the serial number range of my M6TTL.

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!

 

Going to see if I can find another .72 camera tomorrow to look at and see but if it is 0.72 after all then I wonder if I can talk National Camera into paying for the R/F swap to 0.58.  Is this unreasonable of me?

 

Edited December 14, 2022 by jaybeuff

[logan2z]

24 minutes ago, jaybeuff said:

Going to see if I can find another .72 camera tomorrow to look at and see but if it is 0.72 after all then I wonder if I can talk National Camera into paying for the R/F swap to 0.58.  Is this unreasonable of me?

You bought it a few years ago?   They may wonder why it took you so long to realize that your VF wasn't what you thought you bought, but it can't hurt to try.

[250swb]

When I had my .58 TTL I could see the full 28mm frame with glasses, but not much more and to be honest you shouldn't be seeing much more or it would be wasted space. The 90mm frame does become very small in consequence, and looks just like the 135 frame on the .72 finder so be sure you're not misinterpreting this. Keep in mind the illustrations posted above are not renderings with glasses on, they are how you'd see it without glasses.

Edited December 14, 2022 by 250swb

[williamj]

You say you only noticed the 135 frame lines after the CLA. Did you check with DAG whether he’d ‘switched’ the 135 lines back on during the CLA? I know this sounds weird but maybe the 135 lines were switched off to make it look like a .58. Otherwise I have the same question as logan2z in post #16. Cheers and good luck, no one wants to be sold something different to what they ordered. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[stephen.w]

17 hours ago, jaybeuff said:

Hi all,

I have an M6 TTL Black Chrome i purchased back in 2013 that is supposedly a 0.58VF.   After getting it back from a CLA from DAG I noticed that the VF has 135mm framelines, which it shouldnt.

After looking online at 0.58x frameline illustrations I am now wondering if I got scammed when purchasing the M6TTL and its actually a 0.72x VF.   
Trouble is, I dont have any 0.72 VF to check against.  I can see the 28mm frameline with glasses on but there is not a ton of room around it by any means.

Is there a 100% verified list of serial numbers for 0.58 viewfinders?  My camera's serial number is in the 27204** range.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?   

If you move the frame preview lever all the way to the left (as you look through the viewfinder), you should bring up just a single set of framelines, for 35mm. Is this where you are also seeing 135mm framelines? Sounds silly to ask, but are you sure you aren't confusing 135mm framelines with the rangefinder patch?

[jaybeuff]

2 hours ago, williamj said:

You say you only noticed the 135 frame lines after the CLA. Did you check with DAG whether he’d ‘switched’ the 135 lines back on during the CLA? I know this sounds weird but maybe the 135 lines were switched off to make it look like a .58. Otherwise I have the same question as logan2z in post #16. Cheers and good luck, no one wants to be sold something different to what they ordered. 

Good question.  I’ll ask DAG about this.  The frame lines were getting stuck which is one of the reasons I sent it for CLA with him.  
 

I had never seen that frame line illustration posted here that shows the mag differences, so a day or two ago was the first time I noticed it.   When I got the cam back from DAG,  I was like wait a minute that doesn’t seem right.  
 

Yeah the camera was bought a few years back. I had been using 28mm and 35mm exclusively with the Zeiss Ikon ZM for years before that and after a ZM failure I went straight away for the .58 because I had read it was the best for wide angle lenses.
 

This was my first M so I just assumed this was the way it was supposed to be.  Bad on my part I probably should have found a way to see or use some M cameras before buying.