New M3

[ColColt]

No...at least not yet.

 

[ColColt]

Well, it got here and one thing I did notice as mentioned, the 50mm frame line is not as easy to see with glasses as the others but not as bad as I thought. The lines are definitely thicker and more prominent. I took my glasses off just to see the difference and for those who wear contacts or no need for correction at all the 50 lines are a piece of cake. With the glasses on, not so much but tolerable and not as bad as a 35mm lens frame line on the M2 or M4.

I'll run a test roll thought it tomorrow and see how she does. Just a brief inspection and all seems ok. The shutter speeds seem to sound about right but of course, my hearing is not good enough to tell 1/60 from 1/250th of a second so, I'll run a test at different speeds/aperture combinations to see if there's any discrepancies. I'll still most likely send to off to Youxin for a little CLA just the same.

 

[ColColt]

I ran a test roll of HP-5 through it today and all looks well. Frame spacing looks normal as does the density of the negatives. I shot several of the same scene at 125 f11, 250 f8, 500 f5.6 and they all look the same. I seldom shoot lower than 125 so, I didn't go down to 1/60 or 1/30. Still, I don't think it would hurt to send it out for a bit of CLA and new vulcanite. It's not in bad shape but in taking things apart it may become damaged or just fall apart being the age it is.

 

[McFortner]

Beware - these things breed.

That's similar to what happened to me. I got a CL and after taking a look around and seeing all the Minolta SLRs I have decided to have all it's III parents move in as well. I now have a IIIa, IIIc, and a IIIf (BD) to go with it. I guess it figured why just have one side of it's family move in....

 

[ColColt]

Do you know if the rangefinder patch in your M3 has the DOF notches?

I overlooked this earlier. I see no difference between the M3 and the M2 other than the patch looks larger on the M3 with 50's on both of them.

 

[Xmas]

I overlooked this earlier. I see no difference between the M3 and the M2 other than the patch looks larger on the M3 with 50's on both of them.

Leitz added the M2 cut outs to M3 production some time in '58.

 

[ColColt]

There are cutouts, per se, but not what I'd call DOF scale. These"cutouts" are at the top center, bottom, and left/right of the 50 frame line. I see no reason for it but that's the way it is.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

The DOF notches are on the top and bottom of the rangefinder patch itself, not the frame lines. They are very small.

Here you go:

Dead Link Removed

 

[ColColt]

It has a notch at the top and a smaller one at the bottom but I don't follow what those have to do with DOF.The M2 has those same notches but not the M4.

 

[Fixcinater]

Those show you the distance the split image can be apart with it still being in the DOF, allowable mis-match if you will. Top is f/16 and bottom is f/5.6 if I remember correctly.

 

[ColColt]

That makes no sense to me. The top and bottom of the patch will always be the same...maybe I'm missing something.

 

[Xmas]

The double image when not coincident can be used as depth of field indication.

If the double image does not fit in between the slots it will be detectable soft.

You could download the user manual?

And you need another quick load kit?

 

[ColColt]

I have the manual and no, don't need another quick load kit. I've found I can load the film about as fast without it. Being retired, I have all the time in the world.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

It has a notch at the top and a smaller one at the bottom but I don't follow what those have to do with DOF.

The diagram in the link shows how DOF can be assessed.

You can look at the scale on the lens, too, but this was a way for you to do it while keeping the camera at eye level.