Shooting a 35/2 v2 with a M3

[Richard Jepsen]

Last week we were at Rancho De Taos located in Taos, NM. I used a 35/2 v2 on a M5 to photograph the backside of the San Francisco De Asis church. My purpose was to capture how the iconic structure was set in a ramshackle setting. The 35mm FOV was perfect.

I first printed the image as a 5x7 which cuts off the ends of the 135 frame. The second DR session I printed the entire negative at 6 x 9 inches on 8 X 10 paper. Now the image looked better as it recorded the entire 35mm FOV. After printing the neg full frame I want to shoot more frequently with this lens and print size.
.
I intend to use the M3 with my non goggled 35. I will need to purchase an aux viewfinder.

Can people give a review of framing with an aux 35 finder on the M3. Whats the best finder to buy?

 

[Mark Crabtree]

Nice picture. Much more interesting to me than the usual F64 inspired shots.

I have an older Leitz brightline finder for my M3 and screw mount cameras. It has a nice big, bright image, but is a reach to see the framelines with glasses. I'm happy with it. I'm sure there will be a wide range of suggestions; I mostly wanted to comment on your interesting picture.

 

[GregY]

Very nice photo. I've never used 35mm there, just 5x7". 6x8cm & 6x6. IMO the two best ones I have used are the Leitz SBL00 and the metal Voigtlander. I appreciate the clear uncluttered view through the auxilliary finders.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

I shot an M3 for a number of years. The simple solution is to ignore the frame lines. The entirety of the viewfinder is roughly the field of view for a 35mm lens. Don’t make this harder than it needs to be.

 

[MarkS]

I used a 35/2 RF-Summicron on an M3 from 1981-2000. Certainly the best idea, if a bit bulky and (now) expensive. When I bought an M6 and a 35/2 ASPH, I sold the RF-S and bought a Russian 35mm finder for the M3. It worked well for its backup purpose... but perfectly accurate framing is not a Leica's (or any rangefinder's) forte. I suspect that any 35mm finder that has enough eye relief to see the frame corners will do a good job.

 

[craigclu]

I've the V'landers in 21, 28 and 35. Very pleased with all. I wear glasses and can function well with them.

 

[beemermark]

I like aux VF even when I don't need them, for example the Leica 50mm VF on my IIIF. Most VF are excellent, I have the "newer" Leica plastic 21mm VF and think it's the best. I've used the older Leica 21mm VF and while nice it's not as nice as the newer one. I have the older Canon 28mm and 35mm. Others. I've owned the VC VF in the distant past, when they either came with the lens new or were relatively cheap. Seem over priced today. Can't say I liked them that much. They all do the job and I think which ever one you can find at a good price is the one to buy. Aux VF are not a replacement for a SLR screen. One thing to be aware of if you wear glasses (even sun glasses) don't buy the metal ones.

 

[GregY]

I like aux VF even when I don't need them, for example the Leica 50mm VF on my IIIF. Most VF are excellent, I have the "newer" Leica plastic 21mm VF and think it's the best. I've used the older Leica 21mm VF and while nice it's not as nice as the newer one. I have the older Canon 28mm and 35mm. Others. I've owned the VC VF in the distant past, when they either came with the lens new or were relatively cheap. Seem over priced today. Can't say I liked them that much. They all do the job and I think which ever one you can find at a good price is the one to buy. Aux VF are not a replacement for a SLR screen. One thing to be aware of if you wear glasses (even sun glasses) don't buy the metal ones.

The Leitz 21 & 28 came with a plastic surround on the eyepiece. Many finders have of course lost them. I've managed to avoid scratching my glasses. It is though one of the reasons why i sold off my beloved SBLOO and got the metal CV one.

 

[rulnacco]

Maybe not the perfect solution, but as it has been said in various places that the entire M3 viewfinder is a pretty good approximation of 35mm, you could put a bit of black/gaffer tape over the frameline illumination window when shooting with the 35mm. That would make all the framelines disappear, and give you an unobstructed "35mm" field of view.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Maybe not the perfect solution, but as it has been said in various places that the entire M3 viewfinder is a pretty good approximation of 35mm

Understand that the perfect solution is not a perfect solution. The 35mm auxiliary finder is not going to show the frame perfectly. Using the entire M3 finder works just as well.

 

[Richard Jepsen]

Thanks for the suggestions and print comment. I would normally travel with a Minolta CLE 40/2 but I specifically wanted to use a ggr 39mm filter. My 35/2 and 90/2.8 were the only optics I own with that thread.

So a V’lander has an external finder with a plastic eyepiece? On the other hand I could find a yellow green 40.5 filter and sell off the 35/2. The Minolta 40/2 handles very nice on a M3.

 

[GregY]

Thanks for the suggestions. I would normally travel with a Minolta CLE 40/2 but I specifically wanted to use a ggr 39mm filter. A 35mm and 90mm were my only optics with that thread.

So a V’Lander has an external finder with a plastic eyepiece?

I may be mistaken as It's a little hard to tell because it's matte black, but even with my glasses on...they don't touch the finder and a I can see the entire frame outline from an inch or so away since my nose is pressed sideways against the camera back. It do prefer it to the SBLOO ( had several over the decades.... it was my standard...sold them).

 

[qqphot]

SBLOO and SBOOI are pretty amazing. It's like *not* looking through it, except there are framelines.

 

[Axelwik]

No longer have my old M3 - almost never used the 135mm lens, but do use a 35mm lens. It was my first M camera, but sold it off in favor of an M2 with the proper 35mm frame lines - it's been with me all over the world.