21mm viewfinder. Which one?

<p>I'm going to invest in a 21mm lens for my M6 TTL but can't decide which viewfinder to go for. Voigtlanders own viewfinder is probably the cheapest option but I would like your opinions. </p>

<p>FWIW, I have the 21 VC viewfinder. At some point the mask lines have tilted. Have not looked into what it would take to fix this.<br>

<img src="http://www.jimarnold.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/VC-21mmfinder-239x300.jpg" alt="" width="1000" height="1254" /> </p>

 

<p>Hi Jim,</p>

<p>Thanks for that. That's not a good outcome! I'd rather have a viewfinder with frame lines very close to the edge of the viewfinder. I don't really want to see a rectangle in the middle of the view showing the boundaries of a 21mm lens. All the rest is wasted space in my opinion.</p>

<p>Jamie,<br>

It may look like the lines are tiny when you have your eye up to the finder with a lot of wasted space to the outsides, but when you look through it the lines are at the edges of what you can see.</p>

<p>Ok, Jamie. I somewhat ashamedly report I fixed my finder in 5 minutes. Figuring I had nothing to lose, once I look out the two screws holding the top and bottom together, the eyepiece lifts out. Over time the lens simply rotated in the slot. Here's a look inside the finder:<br /> <a href="http://www.jimarnold.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/2016-10-25-20.02.53.jpg"><img src="http://www.jimarnold.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/2016-10-25-20.02.53-300x225.jpg" alt="2016-10-25-20-02-53" width="300" height="225" /></a><br /> Click the above image for a large version. Thanks for spurring me on.</p>

<p>Do you wear glasses? If not a Russian viewfinder can be had cheaply, otherwise Voigtlaender is probably the best choice.</p>

<p>Did the Soviets make 21mms at all? - I never heard of anything wider than a slow 28mm. I splurged on a Zeiss VF. Metal housing and the impression of the optical system radiate more value than a Voigtländer 15mm's.<br>

I didn't abuse the Zeiss hard enough yet to know if Jim's issue will happen to it too or not. I had a rotating FOV mask in my Soviet made turret finder (which I am using on my M8 in its not perfectly optically corrected 28mm setting with the 21mm). <br>

I don't recall which otherwise rather unknown Japanese company made 21mms & matching OVFs back in the age of LTM. - Maybe one of theirs would be good enough and a way to avoid Cosina quality?</p>

<p>@ Jochen: http://cameraquest.com/russian.htm</p>

<p>To Jim:<br>

Ha ha! I'll bet you're glad I asked the question now. Now you have a viewfinder in perfect condition :-)</p>

<p>To David: </p>

<p>No, I don't wear glasses. I have scoured eBay for a Russian 21mm finder but without luck. I assumed they didn't make one until you posted that link. I imagine they are hard to find and I suspect they will sell for at least as much as the Voigtlander version.</p>

 

<p> <em>I suspect they will sell for at least as much as the Voigtlander version.</em><br>

Yes! I have various bits of Russian gear which I bought cheap years ago - sometimes I forget that things have gone up! My 20 mm finder, for example, cost £20 15 years ago :-)</p>

<p>I have just found one on eBay for £140. Expensive, but if it's better than the Voigtlander finder then it would make sense buying it.</p>

<p>Stephen Gandy of Cameraquest mentions that in addition to the Voigtlander 21 mm finder (the metal version new is $209, plastic $20 less), a best buy for him is the Russian 20mm black square finder. Also in the best $ to performance category according to Gandy is the Avenon/Kobalux 21 finder. Apparently both Yashica and Minolta made 20/21 mm finders at one time. These may not be easy to find but maybe worth an Internet search.</p>

<p>My 21mm plastic housing Leica finder is good, but probably expensive on the used market these days. Not sure if it easy to find these days, but the Cosina Voigtlander low angle finder with its accessory VF small screw in attachments for 12, 15 and 21 mm lenses is one I have used often with 12 and 21 mm optics. It is reasonably accurate, although few VFs are spot on in terms of framing and some testing is required to determine their limits in use.</p>

<p>Jamie, I have and have had different 21mm finders. I still like best the metal lyra shaped Leitz finder. It has rounded brightlines. I once broke one when it fell onto concrete ground (shattered glas inside). The newer plastic ones might resist impacts better, and have a somewhat helpful lock. The Zeiss is certainly the best in clarity, but has a brightline which includes the near parallax, only marked by two little stripes, which suggest a FOV of a 43mm on Mamiya 7 (6x7). Also, in the Zeiss the scene is of higher magnification (bigger). To see the complete brightlines on all of them your eye must be dead centered, which is a good thing to achieve framing precision, as far as this goes with an external VF.<br>

Jochen, I think you mean Kobalux/Avenon. They are huge like they were meant for a Nikonos. And probably collectibles.</p>

<p>I liked the VC one, although the metal Leica one is even nicer, but too expensive.</p>

<p>I would recommend the Voigtlander 21mm finder in metal. They are very bright, and the view is clear and contrasty. I keep mine in a film can to keep it dust free when not in use.<br>

I've had the Zeiss finder. Yes, the image is wonderful, but the cost is astronomical for a finder. Also, it's bulky, and has sharp corners which can catch things. The big front glass is flush with the finder metal frame, so there is a risk of scratching that frontal glass.<br>

I've had the Kobalux finder for the 28mm lens, and it was big enough. The 21mm finder is even bigger.</p>

<p>I had a plastic CV 21mm viewfinder that came with the (CV 21mm f4) lens I bought. I am a glasses wearer so either the viewfinder must have enough eye relief or there must be a way for me to fit a correction lens. I have had several CV viewfinders and have always found the eye relief to be inadequate. This 21mm was no exception. Also there's no way to fit a correction lens. I then bought the plastic Leica 21mm viewfinder and it worked, with glasses. Only just but it worked. It would be even better if I did not have to wear glasses. It's relatively expensive but I buy lenses with the intention of keeping them and after a while you forget the cost and just have the pleasure of using it. </p>

<p>It's just a shame there's nowhere near me where I could try them out. It's probably a 4 hour drive minimum to the nearest place that would have these things in stock. And with the price of fuel here in the UK it would cost me half as much as the viewfinder itself just to get there.</p>

<p>I've used the Zeiss 21 finder for many years without glasses. Mr. Lai's comment about the exposed front glass is accurate, I've always been careful due to the possibility of damage and resulting $$. But it is a good, well built finder. </p>

I have owned and used VC 15mm & 21mm finders, both were like looking through the bottom of a bottle compared to the

Zeiss 21mm vf I ended up with.

 

Yes it is expensive and yes it has an exposed front glass ...... but so have many lenses. Just look after it more carefully - or be happy that you have a summilux that sticks out further and will protect it.

 

If you want a great vf experience don't even consider the VC - you will have the Zeiss a long time and can always get your money

back. Or, buy the VC and keep the box .......

<p>Clive, are your VC optics for Leica also in the same bottle bottom category?</p>

<p>The Zeiss finder may top the Leica and VC finders somewhat, but the differences appear to be small and how important are they? Rangefinder cameras have never allowed perfect framing of a subject, which in any case varies with subject distance, and part of the pleasure of the process is in imagining the final result in any case, which is the general case in most photographic reproduction. That is also true it seems for most SLR viewing systems (not sure about DSLRs), which do not have 100% coverage of the frame. </p>

<p>I use a Linhof 6x9 viewfinder that zooms from 53mm to 240mm. Probably too big for your purpose, but 53mm on 6x9cm is about 21mm on 135. This viewer is great for pre-viewing which lens to use in medium format.</p>

<p>I wear glasses and never had a problem with seeing the lines in the 21mm VC plastic finder. I would hope the Zeiss finder is better as it is much more pricey (as is Leica's): I found the VC viewfinders (I had the 28mm too) perfectly fine and they certainly never remotely impeded my previsualisation (to follow on from Arthur's thoughts).</p>

Hi Arthur

 

The only VC lens I have is the 15mm .... and yes it is a bit bottley but that is the nature of such a short lens isn't it. All the

other lenses for the M's I use are either Leica or Zeis but I reiterate that the VC vf is way behind the Zeiss one.

 

Sadly I haven't used any of my gear for the last year due to a self build house project and there only being 30 hours in the day!

 

 

Clive

<p>Clive, good luck. My own long standing heritage house restoration has no fixed finish date, which accommodates a bit of time for occasional photographic follies. As long as there is a roof over our heads,....</p>

<p>Robin, yes, previsualising benefits from more than just perfect equipment, and the chance is usually there to work around any small shortcomings in that regard. </p>

<p>Nothing does it for me like the Zeiss finder, with its big, bright view, and absence of any curvilinear distortion. I never felt confident about my framing with the Leitz finder.</p>