Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/15

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Uses of M series - M2/M6 rangefinder spot brightness
From: "Simon Pulman-Jones" <spulmanjones@lbs.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 14:43:33 -0000

This is only my second posting to the list - the first, about use of R
lenses on a Viso III, received no response, so I hope for better luck this
time.

I am an anthropologist and my research work, which has taken place in
settings such as therapeutic communities for abused children, requires me to
be an unobtrusive participant. In the  past I have struggled to make
photographic records of my work using Nikon SLRs, having to be very up-front
about taking pictures and waiting for the point at which people begin to get
used to my presence. Recently I have made the change to Leica M. I always
wondered whether a rangefinder would work better for me, but held back
because I thought I would find one harder to use than my do-anything F4S. I
now wish I had made the change years ago - using an M2 has completely
removed any awkward consciousness of photograph-taking from the situation.

Since starting with the M2 and 35 and 50 Summicrons I've added a 90
Elmarit-M and a Viso III with 200 Telyt. I use the telephotos for stage
photography - my wife is an actress - and have found the Viso III on the
blue dot setting to be wonderfully quiet.

I have a question that relates to an M6 0.85 that I have acquired recently.
I am surprised to find that the rangefinder image (the one that moves as you
change focus) of the M6 0.85 is less bright and contrasty than that of my
1959 vintage M2. There isn't an enormous difference but it is definitely
there - the M2 double image is easier to focus. The higher magnification of
the M6 is very useful for fine focusing on the 50 and 90 - but I'm a little
disappointed by the double image.

Does this tally with other people's experience? Or should I be sending the
M6 back to Leica for attention?

Thank you to all the regular contributors who make this list such an
invaluable resource, and also to Erwin Putts, Hans Pahlen and Stephen Gandy
whose excellent websites have allowed me to become an enthusiastic
Leicaphile so much more quickly and easily than if I had had to hunt out
information in old magazines and out of print books.

Simon Pulman-Jones
London