An M6 .85 adventure

[TomB_tx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just splurged on an “Excellent” condition M6 with the .85 viewfinder. I’ve used .72 finder M cameras since 1968, and have the M2,4,5,6,&7 versions and the .72 finder has seemed the most versatile. But my eyes are aging, even after cataract replacements with fancy “multifocal” lenses installed. My dominant right eye still has a bit of a shadow image, so RF focusing takes a bit of concentration. I wanted to see how much easier the .85 finder would be.

The body arrived 2 days ago and is from the original batch of .85 M6 from about 1997. Overall the body looks good, with just a bit of fading on the black chrome edges. I hurried to shoot a test roll to check it out. First I noticed that the rewind crank folding lever wouldn’t fold either fully open or closed. Worse, the “knob” body was distorted from a drop on the edge of the knob so it wouldn’t even turn completely around. Hard to shoot a test roll that way. DAG has a new black chrome replacement, but I pulled off the crank and “massaged” it back into reasonable shape so it rotated easily and the folding crank worked as it should. Doesn’t look great, but works for a test roll or two.

I loaded HP5 to try all the shutter speeds and see how even the exposures were. (All was fine), but noticed at infinity stop that fence posts a hundred years away wouldn’t quite coincide in the RF. OK, the rewind indicated a prior drop, so RF calibration could be expected. So shot a short roll of PanF on a close focus test chart with various lenses 50 to 135. All showed noticeable back focus, as the fence post suggested. The longer the focal length the more back focus.

So with no clear view for an infinity object, but with 100 yd fence posts visibly off, I tried the same lens on a few of my other bodies, and noted how much the posts diverged past alignment at infinity stop. So I adjusted the follower roller until the .85 view showed slightly more divergence than the other cameras, thinking that might be needed for the higher magnification. Another test roll showed some front-focus then on all lenses, so I had over-compensated. Another couple of tweaks and a test roll looks fine. Saved a trip to DAG. (Sorry Don!)

These original M6 models use the same screwdriver-slot adjustment as the M3 &4 instead of the new hex wrench design. Final adjustments are so slight a screwdriver doesn’t seem to move – just applies a bit of pressure. The length of the new hex wrench arm would make fine adjustment easier.

So I sequentially shot, processed and scanned 5 rolls in 1-1/2 days, but saved sending it off for calibration.

Don had previously upgraded my 1985 M6 to the “flare fix” and multicoated windows, so it’s the clearest finder (film M) I have. I’d read that the .85 finder doesn’t tend to flare as bad as the original .72 finder, but I’ve already seen mine flare in some conditions, so I’ll see about upgrading it as well.

As to better focus on the .85 finder: with my eyes I can still detect focus better on my .72 M6 with upgraded finder. That seems due to the right eye shadow image, as it focuses fine on my left eye. Time to go back and get the eye checked again. Otherwise…another finder upgrade in the future.

[Advertisement]

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

[grahamc]

The flare free treatment from Don works well on the 0.85.  What focal length are you shooting with 0.85 ?

 My favorite camera has the 0.85, but as mostly a 35mm shooter I find it a bit tight as I wear glasses. Usable with 35 though and Brilliant when using 50. 

[TomB_tx]

I got the .85 mainly for 50 (some 75 & 90), but now being free from glasses I find the 35 frame easily visible, so I'll try it with that also.

On digital I use 35 most, but film still 50. My son and grandkids are starting to shoot film so I'll be doing more as well.

[jakontil]

I too love or may be prefer the .85 ovf, and i found having a dioptre -5 helps a lot with clarity when focusing RF.. 

my main lens is 35 and 50, 28 ocassionally, that’s guesstimates but im oke

[hansvons]

On 11/24/2024 at 8:30 PM, TomB_tx said:

So with no clear view for an infinity object, but with 100 yd fence posts visibly off, I tried the same lens on a few of my other bodies, and noted how much the posts diverged past alignment at infinity stop. So I adjusted the follower roller until the .85 view showed slightly more divergence than the other cameras, thinking that might be needed for the higher magnification. Another test roll showed some front-focus then on all lenses, so I had over-compensated. Another couple of tweaks and a test roll looks fine. Saved a trip to DAG. (Sorry Don!)

This is an interesting topic, as my M6 (regular .72) seems slightly off at infinity, appearing to range-finder a tad too close. Close and medium distances seem to be fine, though. Can you point me to a good source on how to DIY that? 

Thanks!!