C/V Bessa R3A with glasses -- cut off 50mm framelines

Just recieved an R3A by accident -- am waiting on the R2A.

 

I found out the hard way that not only are the 40mm framelines totally

invisible, the 50mm framelines are barely visible.

 

If my eye is placed JUST right, I can see the left, right, and top

frames, but I lose about 20% of the bottom of the 50mm lines.

 

One mm shift, and I've lost either the right or left framelines.

 

The 75mm framelines look a little like the 50mm ones at 0.7x (R2).

 

My right eye has about -6 diopters of correction.

 

This is not going to work for people with strong glasses.

 

-j

My eyeglasses are about 2.5 diopters. I am not surprised with your

evaluation. The Canon P (with 100% viewfinder--the only other one that I

have heard of) Is also very difficult for me to find the 50 and 35 frames.

conclusion---eyeglass wearers should avoid 100% viewfinders. Thats why

Leica has a .58 option.

<p>I wear glasses and am fairly happy using my Bessa P with a 50 mm

lens. However, I can understand how somebody else with my exact facial

contours and specs would not like to do so -- let alone other people with

other noses, other specs. Meanwhile, the 35mm frame is a joke. I can

move my eye around and verify that yes, it exists, but that's about

all.</p><p>Oh well, the CV 75mm lens is highly regarded and not so

pricy, and if you have deep pockets and strong shoulders I suppose the

R3a would be fine for the Summilux (is it called?) 75/1.4 too.</p>

<p>". . . my Bessa P" -- duh, I meant my Canon P.</p>

I had got R3a, but just sold out. I encounter the same problems as J.R.Law. I even cannot see the red read on the bottom sometimes. I agree with Jim Cain say "eyeglass wearers should avoid 100% viewfinders" I had notice that small focusing window of R3a cannot move when the frameline shift lift-up (infinity) and right-down (close-up), which is different with Leice Ms, CL and R2, they will move simultaneously, so the focusing window is always at center of the frameline. But on R3a when taking close-up photo. the focusing window is at the lift-up corner.

From experience -----With a .72 viewfinder the 75 lux is ok. 'An .85 viewfinder

is better. 90mm or 135mm is the best with an M3. Speaking of course, as an

optically challanged user--who wears glasses.. Would that we could buy

them all-----!

The one-to-one viewfinder in the R3A is over-rated. What's so

great about focussing with both eyes open? We're not snipers

and must shoot with both eyes open, or researchers who stare

into a microscope all day! All we do is snap pictures, most of

which we discard anyway, and not because we didn't have a 1 to

1 viewfinder.

The reason you don't see the entire viewing area is because this

camera has a low exit pupil.

I'm a minus 5 myope and I use a Leica III with my glasses on

with no trouble. And Leica IIIs have two viewfinders to deal with. I

think of the old French photographer who gave it to me: he was

more myopic than I am and using this camera he made

hundreds of beautiful photos and sold them to magazines.

Shop around. Wait for the R2A to see if it's any better. Look at the

Rollei. Wait for the Zeiss Ikon.

 

Tom

Everyone,

 

Ahhh... so it is a problem. I'd read here how the 40mm lines were impossible to see, but not the 50mm. So in the interest of public discourse and helping someone else make the right choice I wanted to let people know that with a strong prescription, the 50mm lines are pretty much not visible as well.

 

Tom,

 

Yep... I seem to read that the R3A has poor eye relief (also a problem with lot with low-end telescopes ;) ). It's just really bad.

 

It's interesting that the optics of the M3 are so much better. If it had a built-in meter and Av, I'd switch. But I'm such a poor photographer, I kind of rely on Av... the R2 taught me that by the time I have the speed set correctly, the moment I wanted had already passed. HCB I am not. :)

 

IMHO, the two-eye-open thing is actually really cool. If it worked for me, I would have loved to do it. I felt that I got so much more peripheral vision.

 

Kind of like shooting iron sights vs. an Eotech -- I see more of what's going to move into my frame and I can react SO much faster. (That's another problem with the 50mm on the R3A's 1:1 -- you pretty much give up the ability to see a lot of what's surrounding the 50mm framelines, glasses or not.

 

Right now, it's not much better than shooting an SLR in terms of frame predictability.

 

Sadly, the Rollei and ZI, like the R-1D, is WAY out of my budget.

 

Else I would pick up the ZI to keep my RX and Planars company. :)

 

Thanks,

 

-jon

Hmmm - I wear glasses, and can see the "52mm" (i.e. for 35mm lens cropped 1.5x) framelines very easily in my R-D1 (same 1:1 viewfinder as the Bessa). The frames for the 28 ("42mm equivalent" - widest available) tend to disappear on the right side UNLESS I keep both eyes open.

 

I'll let a visual neurologist explain that trick - but the same thing happens, for me, with the 35mm frames on a Leica .85

 

I like the 1:1 view, especially in the R-D1, since it improves the focusing precision of the short RF (even handles my 135 at 1.5 meters if I'm careful).

I have the RA3 and agree that the 40mm framelines are not that easy to see with glasses on. However, I am not duplicating documents with my photography nor am I shooting so precisely that it really matters. Just concentrating on shooting and focusing with that wonderfully contrast RF patch and I find that my peripheral vision sees enough of the 40mm framelines that it has not presented any real problem.

>JR Law wrote: "Sadly the Rollei . . . is way out of mu budget."

 

Jon, the Rollei 35 RF was badly overpriced, but not any more! It's now $599 at B&H and Adorama - same price as R2A, R3A, & R2 - at least the last few R2's from from Stepehn Gandy.

I wear spectacles. I have been using the R3A for 3 days now. I use the 50mm Summicron and I can comfortably see the complete 50mm framelines. (The 40mm ones are difficult to see though)

 

Maybe it is my aspheric Nikon specs!

Thank you, Andy Piper. I am thinking of getting an RD-1 soon, and was quite

concerned after reading this thead. You saved me from posting an RD-1/eye-glasses

question. (I am aware of the 28mm viewing problem with glasses, and was prepared

to put up with that.)