24/25mm finders

[liam_maloney]

Has anyone tried the new Zeiss 25/28mm finder? My 24mm VF is in pretty rough shape

and I was thinking of replacing it. I want something solid, with good glass. I wish Leica

made a 24mm finder like the metal ones from the 60's.

 

Ok, enough procrastinating, I've got to get back to work. Thanks in advance for any insight

any of you might have.

 

Liam

[huw_finney]

CV springs to mind, bet it's got the same insides as the 'Zeiss' one!

[stuart_richardson]

Huw -- it doesn't. The new Zeiss one is a totally different design. It has brighlines for the 25

and 28mm lenses. It is incredibly clear and well corrected for distortion, much better than the

Voigtlander ones. The downside is that it is going to be very very expensive. I was told a

retail of 400 dollars, which is even more than the Leica Varifocal finder. Perhaps I heard

wrong...but I doubt it. In any case, you can still get the voigtlander 25mm finder for a pretty

reasonable price. If it is anything like their 15 and 21mm finders, it should work very well.

[bill_marshall1]

$491

[huw_finney]

I sit corrected! better be bloody good for $491, that's 250 quid, crikey.

[huw_finney]

All this Japanese made Zeiss stuff seems more expensive than German built Leica, perhaps there is hope for them (Leica) after all.

[liam_maloney]

Wow, 500 bucks is a lot of money to spend on a VF. Huw - here's a MAD project idea: stuff

the optics from my beat-up 24mm VF into the metal housing of an old Leitz 21mm... or

etch additional framelines onto an existing one. Could it be done?

[arthuryeo]

Isn't the Leica variable viewfinder (21/24/28) made of metal?

[huw_finney]

Liam, anything is possible. You could try not bothering about the external looks first, saves an awful lot of money ;7)

[liam_maloney]

Looks ain't the issue. The foot of my current finder broke off; I glued it back. Now the

front element is delaminating, causing lotsa flare. The whole thing is full of dust. It's not

as enjoyable to look through as it used to be. I just want a clean, clear, relatively accurate

VF that won't break too easily. The VC finder might be a good option, but I also like the

idea of etching 24 framelines into an old 21 finder. Hmmm. Thanks for all your responses,

btw.

[steve_york1]

$375 US from Tony Rose at www.popflash.com. He always seems to have some of the best prices around.

[stuart_richardson]

At that price, I would prefer the Leica varifocal finder...it changes magnifications and works

for an extra lens (the 21). The Zeiss is bright and clear, but it is just framelines....

[rjm photo]

I picked up the latest VC 25mm finder (the one with frame lines) to use with my 24mm Elmarit ASPH. It is like the 21mm VC finder, brilliant, easy to use and....inexpensive. Of course both finders are a minimal size so they really are not as noticable as Leica finder when sitting on top of the camera.

[bill_marshall1]

I agree, Robert, the Voigtlander finder is the way to go. The VC 25 mm is cheaper than either the Zeiss or Leica finders. At $245, you'll get an excellent finder . . . & they'll throw in a very nice 25/4 lens for free.

 

Bill

[nasmformyzombie]

I recently got my hands on a Voigtlander BL 25mm finder, which awaits mating with a new Zeiss 25mm lens (sigh). If only someone would buy my re-coated Rigid 'Cron... :)

[owen w.]

I also broke a 24mm VF. Heart-wrenching. Snapped it clean off its foot. Otherwise, mine is beautiful. I've tried several things, including velcro. Obviously not very precise. I, too, have now purchased the CV 25 VF (with the lines), but one must remember that it was not designed for the M body, but for the Bessa body, and they don't line up exactly right. I'm still doing the testing to sort out how close it is for the 24/2.8 on an M body. I was lucky, I guess. I bought my CV 25 for $120 in Bangkok. I still thought it was pricey!

[dan flanders]

If you wear glasses why not borrow a 21 VF (or whatever) and compare what the VF shows with what you see thru one lens of your glasses. If you have large frames make small marks at the edge of the frame at the limits of the scene indicated in the VF. Then use the camera's VF Just for aiming. That way you will soon be able to estimate the coverage of your useable focal lengths with reasonable accuracyc and be free of a lot of expensive junk hanging on the camera and contributing little to the quality of your pictures.

[bill_marshall1]

Harry, wide angle finders are routinely much lower magnification than the camera's viewfinder. I don't see how you could see the entire wide angle field of view through the camera's finder whether the lines are marked on your glasses or marked in the finder itself. The magnification is just too high for that perspective.

 

Bill

[johns1]

I use a new CV 25mm viewfinder with my 25/3.5 Canon since the original, rare Canon 25mm v/f purchased with my lens was unusable. If I use the standard framline in the CV v/f, I cut off the very top of the intended photo. Now I use the dotted line in the v/f as my standard reference. Despite this annoying problem, the optical quality and pricepoint of this CV v/f is appealing. (Makes me wish for the now-discontinued Leica 24mm v/f . . . not to mention the 24mm Elmarit lens itself.)

[dan flanders]

BILL: You don't need to see the whole scene through the VF if you have previously determined its limits by knowledge of the coverage of the given lens. Then you use the standard VF/RF for ranging and aiming. This was common practice before dedicated viewfinders became readily available. It is highly unlikely that RF cameras will ever incorporate finders for lenses wider than 28's. Factor in that auxiliary finders are becoming almost as costly as prime lenses and you have an economic limitation to acquisition of dedicated finders. I am not opposed to auxiliary finders use them when necessary, but I have also noticed that constant dependence thereon instead of learning the limitations of the lens ultimately tends to inhibit reasoned composition in addition to cluttering the camera with clumsy and expensive appendages.

[eliot_rosen1]

$ 491 for a Zeiss 25 mm finder made in Japan? makes the Leica 24 mm seem like a bargain, since these can be had for about $ 250 or so. BTW, the reason that Leica went from metal to plastic body finder was because people would occasionally damage the camera by tearing the accessory shoe using the metal finder. With the plastic body finders, you would tear off the finder's foot rather than the camera shoe, if you applied too much pressure.

 

I personally prefer the older Leitz metal finders.

[bill_marshall1]

Harry, I agree & do what you described with wide angle lenses. Especially when people are my subject & I want to include some background but am not so fussy just how much background, it works very well for me. Sorry that I didn't understand your original explanation.

[bill_marshall1]

Thanks for the tip, Eliot. Sounds like a great price. I was going to buy the CV finder, but this would be really tempting. Where are they available for $250?

 

Bill

[dan flanders]

BILL: Though I have used auxiliary finders in the past, and still use them on occasion, I have long resented their expense when compared to their utility. Many years ago one of my first lens additions to my old III was the 35mm Elmar. I couldnt afford any of the finders I could find so I borrowed an Imarect and by observing typical scenes managed to estimate the field of the 35 even though I could not see all of it through the camera's squinty finder. Then some time later when I finally managed to pay for an Imarect I found its bulk an inhibitor to carrying it in my pocket. Even with the longer focal lengths it only masked down the scene and in most instances the naked eye was far superior. I suppose that I waste a bit of my lens's coverage in allowing for cropping, but it is still nice to be free of unnecessary encumbrancies. The bit about marking my glasses was for evaluating the scene, not for looking thru the VF.

[eliot_rosen1]

Bill Marshall

 

Sorry, I didn't see your post until now. Don Chatterton has two 24 mm Leica brightline VFs for sale, one for $ 199 and the other for $ 250. They're not metal, but they work well. I have one I use with my 24/2.8 Elmarit-M.