.68 and rangefinder's magnification

[Nikon 2]

What is the best focal length for a .68 rangefinder magnification…!

 

[koraks]

Why do you think it matters?
Or more to the point - why do you think there's a relationship between viewfinder magnification and the focal length of the lens you use, and in particular why such a relationship would dictate what lens to choose?

If you're trying to drive a nail into a board, will you choose between doing this with a hammer or with a t-shirt based on the color of the shirt?

 

[Nikon 2]

Why do you think it matters?
Or more to the point - why do you think there's a relationship between viewfinder magnification and the focal length of the lens you use, and in particular why such a relationship would dictate what lens to choose?

If you're trying to drive a nail into a board, will you choose between doing this with a hammer or with a t-shirt based on the color of the shirt?

Since Leica uses different magnifications on their rangefinder cameras I assumed there was a reason…

 

[Rockaway Studios]

It’s a functionality thing. The original M3 had a different rangefinder that maxed out a 50mm brightline, and for 35mm you used a bug eyes equipped lens. The .68 has the bright lines for 35mm as the full frame, so, I guess you could say 35mm is the “best”

btw, if you get a bug eyes 35mm, you don’t have to remove the bug eyes for it to work on later cameras than the M3 and your camera looks 22.4% cooler with a bug eyes lens.

 

[Nikon 2]

It’s a functionality thing. The original M3 had a different rangefinder that maxed out a 50mm brightline, and for 35mm you used a bug eyes equipped lens. The .68 has the bright lines for 35mm as the full frame, so, I guess you could say 35mm is the “best”

btw, if you get a bug eyes 35mm, you don’t have to remove the bug eyes for it to work on later cameras than the M3 and your camera looks 22.4% cooler with a bug eyes lens.

Makes sense, thanks…