Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> > > > > The M3 viewfinder is the best one available for > Noctilux > > > > > > > Why? > > > > > > My dear Hamlet! M3, having the same rangefinder base > > > (about 69mm) has highest magnification (.91x), so > > > focussing accuracy is very high... > > > > That doesn't make it 'better'. Do you know that the > mechanical tolerances > > are higher on the 3 than the 6? > > It seems that you agree that M3 is better built? No I do not agree or disagree. I don't know either way. My guess would be the M6 uses better/more modern materials and techniques, and has higher precision in assembly than the aged M3. If that were true, then the M6 would have better mechanical tolerances, and hold these tolerances better than the M3. I don't know this for a fact, but without this information a valid conclusion can't be made. > 1. With higher magnification (0.91) of M3, focusing is > simpler, because split of image is easier to see. I agree with that, but that doesn't mean it focuses better, just that the magnification is higher. The higher magnification would certainly aid in obtaining better focusing if everything else were equal, no doubt, but it is not clear that everything else is equal. > With paper-thin Noctilux' DOF, you want to try to > focus as accurately as you can... :) Of course. > > The materials better, so there is less wear > > over time...etc.? > What has this to do with Noctilux focusing? Possibly everything. If the M3 was not designed/built with the same tolerances and materials then they are different. The ability to adjust the rangefinder and for it to maintain accuracy will only be as good as the design tolerances and materials will allow. > So why don't you take a M3 and M6 and actually > try it for your own, mister? :) > All opinions on LUG are personal ones. For more > science facts, check following links: > > http://www.cameraquest.com/leica.htm This uses only one criteria, and ignores the design difference, material differences and tolerance difference between the two cameras, so IMO, it is an inaccurate conclusion. > http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/technics/rfaccuracy.html That also does not take into account the possible differences I mentioned above. Without taking all factors into consideration, you can't draw an accurate conclusion.