petermcwerner Posted October 10, 2006 Share #61 Posted October 10, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) I did a little playing with dpr's frame shots, too. I was trying to figure out how the metering pattern followed the frame lines, since the metering area wont show. I also corrected dpr's images to 2:3 from the 4:3 aspect ratios. With the 50mm, 24mm & 28mm, the smaller inner frame does sort of approximate the metering area. As others have mentioned these images might not be accurate. Hi Bob, others, I have never used a metered M (know only M3 and M4). Will the metering pattern follow the frame lines when you select the frames with the manual preview lever? This is important if you use some 3rd party (e.g. Nikon F) or older SM lenses with an adapter, as most adapters bring always up the 50mm frames. And how does the camera know whether you have installed a 28mm or a 90mm lens (same for another pair) and adjust the metering area, since they share the same frame set? Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 10, 2006 Posted October 10, 2006 Hi petermcwerner, Take a look here M8 can frame lines be removed. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Bob Ross Posted October 10, 2006 Share #62 Posted October 10, 2006 I will use this camera a lot for event work with flash reason for the 28 and 35 . It will work better than the DMR here. It has to do more than just be a street shooting camera for me. It is supposed to back up and take over certain area's where I can leave the DMR out of it. It is just the 28 is important and I am basing this off my use off the DMR 19,28 , 35 and 80 are used a lot. The M will bring me at least 2 stops better in noise and more DR and able to focus in no light, perfect for PR work. Plus i have full use of my Metz flash Hi Guy, The 28mm being almost the same as the long side of the sensor (27mm) will get you a 1:1 relationship between the focus distance and the width of the frame field. In an event, if you tend to work in close, say 6 ft, your field will be 6ft wide X 2ft tall (landscape orientation). This is the reason why 35mm seems to be popular with 35mm film. It all depends on your style and how you relate to the subject...posed or candid. Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted October 10, 2006 Share #63 Posted October 10, 2006 I must say that I've never gotten to like the 1.25 magnifier, as I always have the feeling that the magnification is offset by the slight darkening of the viewfinder from the magnifier. Mitch-- As you know, you're right. But I'll bounce off your comment to bring it into perspective for those who aren't as versed in optics as you: Higher magnification with the same entrance pupil means reduced light output. 8x20 binoculars are brighter than 10x20 binoculars, for example. As a matter of fact, that's why Leica chose not to go with a 1:1 finder in the M3; the slight reduction in magnification served to increase apparent brightness. Later Leica moved to a 0.72x standard and got a slightly brighter finder again; now they've gone to a 0.68x finder and it will be marginally brighter once more. Putting the 1.25x magnifier on it will cause a bit of dimming, but only to about the same brightness as the à la carte 0.85x finder, and it will still be brighter than the M3. Leica will not likely admit that LCT is right, but the reduced circle of confusion implied by the reduced sensor plus the reduced focusing accuracy of the 0.68x finder would make it very reasonable to consider using the 1.25x magnifier. The camera will doubtless do just fine without it, but for critical results with an f/1 or f/1.4 lens, the magnifier would be an asset. My opinion, of course. --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted October 10, 2006 Share #64 Posted October 10, 2006 Actually if you went 21,28 than it is actually quite good . the 90 frame line is so small you overlook it Leica's choices in these things have all been spot on, in my opinion. Some folks complain that the 50 and 75 frames are so close together, but in fact--speaking here from personal experience with the 75/1.4: The 50mm lenses hardly intrude into the 50 frame and you just naturally work with the 50 frame with most 50mm lenses. The 50/1.0 is large and does intrude more, so that may deflate my argument. With the 75 Summilux, the lens is large and masks a fair amount of the lower right part of the finder. That is a not-so-subtle reminder that you don't use the 50 frame but the 75. But all this is just theory. I think you'll quickly get used to the quirks of the frame lines; they will very quickly seem natural. "Der Ball ist rund; das Spiel dauert 90 Minuten. Alles andere ist Theorie." --Franz Beckenbauer --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted October 10, 2006 Share #65 Posted October 10, 2006 Will the metering pattern follow the frame lines when you select the frames with the manual preview lever? This is important if you use ... older SM lenses with an adapter, as most adapters bring always up the 50mm frames. Peter-- The frame lines and metering are not coupled. Metering pattern is determined by the lens you are using. When you use the frame preview lever, all it does is show you the fields of view of lenses that are not mounted. As for adapters, there are three versions, one for 35mm, one for 50mm and one for 90mm. Check the Zeiss/Voigtländer site for ordering information. (Leica also offered three different versions, of course.) And how does the camera know whether you have installed a 28mm or a 90mm lens (same for another pair) and adjust the metering area, since they share the same frame set? Same answer as above. What the meter reads is the light reflected off the white shutter blade, and that is determined by the lens mounted. The camera's metering has no idea what lens is there. Very simple and direct. Bob's very nice diagrams are good guides to the metering: Use the next smaller frame than the one for the lens you are using, and consider that frame to be the center of something between a spot and a center-weighted averaging meter (since the weighting extends primarily along the horizontal dimension). In other words: If you're using a 28mm lens, the 90 frame represents the primarily-metered area, with some sensitivity extending off to both sides. If you're using a 90mm lens, the rangefinder patch represents the main metered area. --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted October 10, 2006 Share #66 Posted October 10, 2006 ... if you tend to work in close, say 6 ft, your field will be 6ft wide X 2ft tall ... Bob-- Minor typo: should be 6 ft x 4 ft, shouldn't it? --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
petermcwerner Posted October 10, 2006 Share #67 Posted October 10, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) The frame lines and metering are not coupled. Metering pattern is determined by the lens you are using. Thank you, Howard, for your clear explanation. Since you always see the same image in the viewfinder, you have to mentally adjust for the lens you are using. This calls for some re-programming of our brains - the SLRs are opium for the photographers, make things too easy... Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ross Posted October 10, 2006 Share #68 Posted October 10, 2006 Bob--Minor typo: should be 6 ft x 4 ft, shouldn't it? --HC Yup Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ross Posted October 10, 2006 Share #69 Posted October 10, 2006 This calls for some re-programming of our brains - the SLRs are opium for the photographers, make things too easy...Peter That is what prompted me to do the meter pattern composite. When you are shifting back and forth between RF and SLR, it gets real easy to forget how things are being metered:o I have tended to carry an incident light meter with RFs for a second opinion. Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted October 10, 2006 Share #70 Posted October 10, 2006 Thank you, Howard, for your clear explanation. Since you always see the same image in the viewfinder, you have to mentally adjust for the lens you are using. This calls for some re-programming of our brains - the SLRs are opium for the photographers, make things too easy... Peter-- Thanks for calling it 'clear'! After I posted it, I got to thinking I had not attacked the issue from the right side, but when you say 'you have to mentally adjust for the lens you are using,' I know the explanation was clearer than I feared. --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 10, 2006 Share #71 Posted October 10, 2006 Heard back from Linda on this Good Afternoon Guy, Spoke with Leica regarding the frame lines... Currently this is only available under the a la carte Program... The process is completed during the assembly of the camera... There is no masking of frame lines, there is a special plate installed with the particular Frame line requested during assembly... Doing so after the fact would require a complete disassembly of the camera and replacement of plates... Leica would not give a quote for the process, since this is only available with the M7 and MP; under the a la carte program... On the 21mm default lines... Leica indicated that it defaulted to the furthest left... 28-90... Both frame lines come up, because there are two frame lines per plate... On my M6 without lens and with the 21mm on... Lens off - default is 35-135mm... Lens on – default is 28-90mm... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
harmsr Posted October 10, 2006 Share #72 Posted October 10, 2006 That is surprising news. In the demo she stated that Leica NJ would do it. In any of the other M cameras, I know that you can send the camera to Sherry Krauter or DAG and they will mask out the ones you don't want. I had it done on an M7 and was very happy. My guess is that Leica doesn't want to mess with it right now, but it will be an option later. I don't think that I'm willing to be the guinea pig on sending the M8 for disassemby to any third party and possibly damage the camera or void the warranty. It looks like we will be dealing with the standard framelines for awhile. Ray Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted October 11, 2006 Share #73 Posted October 11, 2006 I still don't understand why you would want to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 11, 2006 Share #74 Posted October 11, 2006 Heard back from Linda on this Good Afternoon Guy, Spoke with Leica regarding the frame lines... Currently this is only available under the a la carte Program... The process is completed during the assembly of the camera... There is no masking of frame lines, there is a special plate installed with the particular Frame line requested during assembly... Doing so after the fact would require a complete disassembly of the camera and replacement of plates... Leica would not give a quote for the process, since this is only available with the M7 and MP; under the a la carte program... On the 21mm default lines... Leica indicated that it defaulted to the furthest left... 28-90... Both frame lines come up, because there are two frame lines per plate... On my M6 without lens and with the 21mm on... Lens off - default is 35-135mm... Lens on – default is 28-90mm... Hi Guy, I know that's dissapointing news for you but it doesn't surprise me. What had surprised me was Ray's comment that Leica had said they would do it. Probably just a mis-statement to Ray from someone. In any case, we're back to what I said initially to you near the beginning of this thread which is that this change cannot be made easily. I could, however, see Leica offering various a la carte options for the M8 down the road. Meanwhile, a lot of this RF stuff will seem strange to you just because it's new. I wouldn't try to change anything on the M8 until you start to get a feel for it. Things that may seem problematic now may come to seem fine with familiarity. An RF is a different animal for sure and there's definately a "getting acquainted" period. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
harmsr Posted October 11, 2006 Share #75 Posted October 11, 2006 Rob, I'm not trying to be a smarta## with this question. Have you ever shot any of the early M cameras like an M3 or M5? For example, my M5 only has frame lines for the 35, 50, & 90. For me the uncluttered viewfinder is just much easier to use. (again that is for me) My lens set is 28, 35, 50, & 75. The 28 is new for me and to use with the cropped M8 basically making it a 37 or recovering the FOV of my 35. This is something very personal for me. In a film M of .72x VF, I can't see the 28 lines using my glasses. I also don't like to shoot 28 or wider with a rangefinder. I don't shoot a 135 FL in a film M either because of the small frame lines and the more difficult focusing. For me, a range finder is a 35-90 FL camera. In my situation that I will primarily use the M8 with the 28, 35, & 50 FL lenses (cropped out to a FOV of 37, 46, & 66), I prefere to eliminate the clutter in the VF of the 24, 75, and 90 framelines. This is ideal for me personally. For those who want to shoot the other focal lengths or are just deciding what focal length will work for their shooting, then no they would not want to eliminate any of the frame lines. Best, Ray Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipotto Posted October 11, 2006 Share #76 Posted October 11, 2006 Ever notice the threads that Guy starts are always hot? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
harmsr Posted October 11, 2006 Share #77 Posted October 11, 2006 That is just because Guy is a BIG TROUBLE MAKER!!!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 11, 2006 Share #78 Posted October 11, 2006 Okay since this is the case how much would I lose on a 21 using the Full Frame. Because now i really lean to 21,28,35 and still figuring out the back end maybe 75 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 11, 2006 Share #79 Posted October 11, 2006 Hi Guy, I may be able to answer that question for you specifically next week but trying to use the full window for a 21 is going to involve many compromises: lens will capture noticeably more than is shown in the finder, there will be no parallax correction and you won't be able to see the edges of the picture (what is in and what is out). The camera is not designed to work with a 21 without an accessory finder - why swim upstream? I'd still suggest that you work with an RF a bit to get a better feel for things before you lock in your lens choices. You know already that I think the 24 makes a lot of sense with the M8. There's no rush on the lens purchases is there? Why not rent a couple (21, 24, etc.) and experiment for the first week with the M8? Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 11, 2006 Share #80 Posted October 11, 2006 Thanks Sean was just trying to figure the 21 out . Sorry if I drove everyone crazy here but as you can see i do my homework and research all my possibilities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.