Hexar RF

[chgoh]

Granted.

In my opinion, using the Elmarit 90 on anything with an effective base length less than that of a 0.72X Leica M is a no-no. With this use, one is simply fighting the inevitabilities of engineering design limits. Which is why there are many who still stick with the M3 with a close to life size mag. For those who are interested, the comparative effective base length of some existing M rangefinders are as follows:

• Leica M3 0.91X 62 mm
• Leica M 0.85X 59 mm
• Leica M 0.72X 49 mm
• Leica M 0.58X 40 mm
• Konica Hexar RF (0.60X) 41 mm
• Minolta CLE 28 mm
• Leica CL 18 mm

So long focal lengths (anything greater than 50mm, in my opinion), is stretching the limits of rangefinder camera design. One of the design reasons why you would not find longer than 135mm designs for Leica Ms, saved for the Novoflexes which were SLR anyway.

As an experiment, I would encourage that the same test be done on a Leica M 0.58X, Leica CL or Minolta CLE for a comparison.

One more note. From the VF magnification, it really suggests that the RF was designed for wide angle usage.

chgoh @ 9:45pm on 02 May 2004

Er..But.. the Tri-Elmar is an f4 lens, and with focal lengths of 28-35-50mm, any focusing inaccuracy would be masked off. For my case, it was used with an M90 f2.8 lens, and the error at 3m was noticeable enough to render the image unacceptable. I know EP's BS but for the Hexar RF, focusing is an issue (okie, it's just me )

 

[y0gi0h]

From the VF magnification, it really suggests that the RF was designed for wide angle usage.

Really? But but didn't Konica "produce" (reads "copy") a 90/2.8 M-Hexanon lens that Dante Stella shouts about?? Isn't that short tele lens supposed to be used on the Hexar RF (rather than on an M3??) What give? :dunno:

 

[chgoh]

It's true, Konica do/did have a 90/2.8. I think you were referring to the article Stella wrote titled Konica 90/2.8 M-Hexanon. I'mt not sure all of the pics in that article were taken with the M3, but on a sentence he did say "And below, some fun with T-Max 100, Aculux 2 (1+9, 9 min at 20 degrees C), the 90 Hexanon wide-openat 1m, and a Leica M3. Top is a 5x7 proportion; bottom is 50x enlargement (75x50 inch print?!)".

So granted, I would not use any lens with a focal length greater than 50mm on a body that have an effective baselength of less than that from a 0.72x M.

chgoh @ 9:09 am, 3 May 2004

But but didn't Konica produce (reads "copy") a 90/2.8 M-Hexanon lens that Dante Stella shouts about?? Isn't that lens supposed to be used on the Hexar RF (rather than on an M3??) What give? :dunno:

 

[XXX Boy]

It's true, Konica do/did have a 90/2.8. I think you were referring to the article Stella wrote titled Konica 90/2.8 M-Hexanon. I'mt not sure all of the pics in that article were taken with the M3, but on a sentence he did say "And below, some fun with T-Max 100, Aculux 2 (1+9, 9 min at 20 degrees C), the 90 Hexanon wide-openat 1m, and a Leica M3. Top is a 5x7 proportion; bottom is 50x enlargement (75x50 inch print?!)".

So granted, I would not use any lens with a focal length greater than 50mm on a body that have an effective baselength of less than that from a 0.72x M.

chgoh @ 9:09 am, 3 May 2004

chgoh, I need to agree with you that rangefinders are not really meant for long-tele lenses. And shooting wide-open with a 90mm f2 on a .58 is a hit-and-miss...

 

[kingpin]

Thanks for the interesting discourse. Most of what is being discussed is about the EBL. The Hexar RF is 0.6 so its EBL is 41 hence it will have the same focussing accuracy as the M 0.58 viewfinders. Hence I agree like the M system u choose the camera with the view finder mag for your use. 0.58 for wider lenses and 0.85 for long lenses. 0.72 if u wan to be safe or prefer a wide range of lenses.
But the problem i read about has to do with the flange to plate rail distance. For those of u who do have the Hexar and used it with the Leica M lenses did u find u have less sharp pics compared to using them on your M camera. Vice versa for Hexanon lens on M cameras.
I have read both Dante Stella and Erwin Puts articles, both have almost opposite views. I wan some of your experiences. I'm thinking of the Hexar as a back up to the M7. Reassuring to know that Yao do carry it as his back up too.
y0gi0h - Did u use your 90 elmarit on a Leica camera? If so wat is mag of your Leica M viewfinder? u had a Hexar, wan to share more about this camera.

 

[y0gi0h]

In my opinion, using the Elmarit 90 on anything with an effective base length less than that of a 0.72X Leica M is a no-no. With this use, one is simply fighting the inevitabilities of engineering design limits. Which is why there are many who still stick with the M3 with a close to life size mag. For those who are interested, the comparative effective base length of some existing M rangefinders are as follows:

• Leica M3 0.91X 62 mm
• Leica M 0.85X 59 mm
• Leica M 0.72X 49 mm
• Leica M 0.58X 40 mm
• Konica Hexar RF (0.60X) 41 mm
• Minolta CLE 28 mm
• Leica CL 18 mm

So long focal lengths (anything greater than 50mm, in my opinion), is stretching the limits of rangefinder camera design.

According to EP (the infamous Leica Guru who also likes to BS with numbers BTW), a 90/2.8 lens needs only an effective base length of ONLY 28.9mm (far less than the Hexar RF's 41mm mentioned).

RF Accuracy according to Puts

So, which "guru" should one listen to?? :dunno:

BTW, can someone confirm if the 0.58x Leica M has 90mm framelines? If so, they must have make a great mistake, rite?

 

[y0gi0h]

y0gi0h - Did u use your 90 elmarit on a Leica camera? If so wat is mag of your Leica M viewfinder? u had a Hexar, wan to share more about this camera.

Ooops! kingpin, we almost posted at the same time.

I use the 90 Elmarit on my M4 (x0.72) with no focusing problem at all. As for the Hexar RF, I have sold it more than a year ago. It's well built, great for 28mm lens, with the convenience of AE and motor-drive. The RF patch is less contrasty cf. the Leica M, the shutter lag is longer for sure, and it's a lot more noisey than an M. Because of the issue of focusing accuracy, I felt that it wouldn't do justice to the Leica lenses, hence sold it.

BTW, I understand that the Hexar RF is now discontinued. Not worth buying IMHO.

 

[glchua]

According to EP (the infamous Leica Guru who also likes to BS with numbers BTW), a 90/2.8 lens needs only an effective base length of ONLY 28.9mm (far less than the Hexar RF's 41mm mentioned).

RF Accuracy according to Puts

So, which "guru" should one listen to?? :dunno:

BTW, can someone confirm if the 0.58x Leica M has 90mm framelines? If so, they must have make a great mistake, rite?

Yes, my 0.58 MP has the 90mm framelines (I would rather call it "corner guides) together with the 28mm framelines.

 

[glchua]

I remembered a website (www.cameraquest.com?) reporting that the lense register distance is actually shorter on the Hexar RF, and Konica did admit the incompatibility in terms of focussing.

 

[y0gi0h]

Yes, my 0.58 MP has the 90mm framelines (I would rather call it "corner guides) together with the 28mm framelines.

From your first hand user experience (not from reading, hearsay), are those 90 framlines useable on a 0.58X ?

(I ask 'cos I am going to get a 0.58x MP very soon, like tonite :bsmilie: )
Or, are you keen to swop your 0.58 MP with a brand new 0.72 MP (BP version)

 

[glchua]

From your first hand user experience (not from reading, hearsay), are those 90 framlines useable on a 0.58X ?

(I ask 'cos I am going to get a 0.58x MP very soon, like tonite :bsmilie: )
Or, are you keen to swop your 0.58 MP with a brand new 0.72 MP (BP version)

I was toying around with the framelines, the 90mm is really small but if you can visualise the image (I use a 85mm on an SLR quite frequently), it should not be an issue. One thing I don't like is that the focussing patch will cover most of the subjects face and I find that distracting. If you focus on one eye, the whole face seems OOF.

Where are you getting your 0.58 MP? I bought the last piece from Cathay about a month back.

I had tried a 0.72M6, besides the "roughness", I couldn't see the whole frameline for 35mm (I wear glasses, non-Leica though ) , so I gave it a miss and took the plunge to buy a new MP. So you have to pry the 0.58 off my dying hands if you want mine .

 

[y0gi0h]

I was toying around with the framelines, the 90mm is really small but if you can visualise the image (I use a 85mm on an SLR quite frequently), it should not be an issue. One thing I don't like is that the focussing patch will cover most of the subjects face and I find that distracting. If you focus on one eye, the whole face seems OOF.

Where are you getting your 0.58 MP? I bought the last piece from Cathay about a month back.

I had tried a 0.72M6, besides the "roughness", I couldn't see the whole frameline for 35mm (I wear glasses, non-Leica though ) , so I gave it a miss and took the plunge to buy a new MP. So you have to pry the 0.58 off my dying hands if you want mine .

Juz kidding :bsmilie:
Chinese saying: "Gentleman does not rob someone's favourite".

I'm getting a BP version from the States, EX but wat to do

 

[glchua]

Juz kidding :bsmilie:
Chinese saying: "Gentleman does not rob someone's favourite".

I'm getting a BP version from the States, EX but wat to do

BP 0.58 MP ?? :bigeyes:

Don't even know such a beau exist!

 

[y0gi0h]

BP 0.58 MP ?? :bigeyes:

Don't even know such a beau exist!

Here goes:

BP 0.58 MP

 

[kingpin]

y0gi0h - thanks for sharing. Well i know the hexar is discontinued. But its closest to an M7 with M-motor. I like the workflow with AE and motor drive. Hmmm - don't wish to get another M7 as back up, rather get an MP (LHSA ;p ). I think the EBL of the Hexar is not only factor in focussing accuracy but the dimmer focus patch makes it more difficult to focus with long lense.

I'm quite keen to get the Hexar RF. Anyone selling?

The 0.58 M7 has 90 frameline. I do have the 1.25x mag to make it 0.72 for my normal use. Gives me better flexibility as can remove the 1.25x mag whenever I need to use wide lenses.

 

[dreamseeker]

Kingpin,

Do you know how much is the 1.25x mag? Thought of getting it for my 0.72 M6.

I am learning a lot of RF stuff with all the discussion going on here. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[kingpin]

Kingpin,

Do you know how much is the 1.25x mag? Thought of getting it for my 0.72 M6.

I am learning a lot of RF stuff with all the discussion going on here. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Think its about $400. Check with CP for exact pricing. Its very ex for such a small piece of glass. Sigh Leica!!!

 

[glchua]

Kingpin,

Do you know how much is the 1.25x mag? Thought of getting it for my 0.72 M6.

I am learning a lot of RF stuff with all the discussion going on here. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Same here!

I am also thinking of the 1.25X eyepiece when I have the funds for a 90.

Kingpin,
Does the eyepiece attach conveniently?
I wonder if you had seen this ad:
http://offstone.sigma2k.com/photo/showthread.php?threadid=12212

 

[kingpin]

Same here!

I am also thinking of the 1.25X eyepiece when I have the funds for a 90.

Kingpin,
Does the eyepiece attach conveniently?
I wonder if you had seen this ad:
http://offstone.sigma2k.com/photo/showthread.php?threadid=12212

Ya saw the ad, but lady sold the set already.

Yes the 1.25x attaches quite easily. CP has it, u can ask to try it there. Otherwise I can meet up with u for u to try it.

For those who are interested there are a few good sites talking about the Leica M (or R):

www.kbcamera.com/equipreview.htm
www.cameraquest.com
www.imx.nl
www.nemeng.com
www.dantestella.com

Hmmm - i wonder why none mention the rollei RF, which have the leica M mount and same functions as the hexar RF.

 

[chgoh]

Hmmm - i wonder why none mention the rollei RF, which have the leica M mount and same functions as the hexar RF.

I think this is an OEM from CV.

chgoh @ 4:13 pm, 4 May 2004