eye-level vs. WL finders?

[jnorman2]

oye - just a quick poll of you "users". i have owned a few MF

systems, including hasselblads, P67s, mamiya 645s, and an old

norita. i bought a mamiya 645AFD a little while back to play with,

and discovered that i really disliked autofocus, really hated the

autowinder, and REALLY did not like the eye-level finder.

previously, i had a hassy 501CM with a 45 prism on it, and that

wasnt too bad. even when i was using a P67 with an architectural

lens on it, i preferred using a WL to the prism finder. i guess i

just like regular old WL finders where i can see the entire image,

and either shoot it up near my eye using the magnifier, or down near

my waist, or even holding it upside down over my head if i need a

little higher vantage point to get over some foreground doodlege or

whatever. i like to focus manually, and i like to wind my own film

crank.

 

so, how many of youse guys (not counting you wedding shooters - i

know you probably need the eye-level for quick response) use eye-

level finders by choice? how many WL afficianados?

 

and while we're at it - how many of you like autowinders and

autofocus on MF cameras?

[garyowen]

I shoot a Mamiya TLR system and have at one time or another went to the eye level finders, but always find myself going back to the WLF, I do like the magnified WL finder that's availible for this system as you can really fine tune your focus. But WLF has my vote.

[jeff.grant]

I'd love to be able to use a WLF but it would be a 'glasses on, glasses off' drive me nuts operation so I use a PME45 with inbuilt diopter and leave my glasses in their case. On the subject of winders, I do find it just a tad bizarre that I get to wind the film crank between shots with a digital back on my 503CW.

[rich815]

I actually like using WLF on my Rolleiflex, Praktica and friend's Hassy. It gives a cool looking image, IMO. However, it's not always practical for street photography and such where I find eye-finder to be better to follow any action and better for faster focusing.

[rick_sikora]

Prefer the WLF on my P67, (I also have the metered prism and um-metered prism) also prefer the WLF for my Mamuya TLR and Minota Autocord. My first MF camera was a TLR with WL finder so maybe that is why and what I am used to using. I like the WL finder best on the P67 because it gives 100% view. Rick

[douglas_green1]

IMHO, I definitely prefer the Waist Level finder when shooting a square format. But these are pretty useless for shooting a vertically oriented rectangular format - unless the camera has a rotating back.

 

If you have to shoot both horizontal and vertical with the same setup, you need to have a rotating film back, or some type of prism finder.

[akajohndoe]

I have a non-metering prism finder for my Mamiya RZ, but prefer the waist-level as it shows more of the image, is easier to focus, weighs less, and balances on the camera better.

 

Actually the only advantage to the prism finder (and it makes all the difference sometimes) is the ability to actually use the camera without a ladder! Ladders just do not fit into my hiking packs very often.

[d_purdy]

I use a Rollei TLR and echo the sentiment of glasses on and off with the WLF.

If you need reading glasses it is a real hassle to use the WLF because you

have to take your glasses of to focus then put them back on to compose.

 

now that being said I do like using the WLF and have discovered that you

don't have to put your eye right on the magnifyer to focus. You can leave the

camera at waist level and pop up the magnifyer and focus with your glasses

on and eyes at a distance. Looking at the image on a ground glass from a

distance and judging the picture that way is far better than having your eye

plugged into a prism.

 

That being said I ususally work with the prism because I can focus more

quickly and the image is oriented correctly and I can respond to changing

situations more quickly.k

 

So for me the prism is the main thing and the WLF is the luxury.

[mag_miksch]

Since the days of Nikon F3 I am with WLF^^

[byronlawrence]

yea I have never used the prism finder on my mf or any 'auto' anything, I might like an auto winder back but i cannot ever imagine using a prism finder not to mention the possible added weight on an already heavy camera. and since i barely like the AF systems in 35mm cameras I don't think a MF AF system will be any better than what I can do.

[OCULUS New York]

Maybe I shoot too many dynamic objects, but I prefer the 45 deg Rollei prism to the WF. The only time I use a semi-WF is the chimney magnifier when using my Schneider 55 PC lens, and need to check depths of field. Otherwise, I find the L-R reversal far too disorienting. I'm sure if I HAD to get used to it I could, but since I have all 4 Rollei versions (90, 45, Chimney and WF), I only use the appropriate one for the job.

Ray Hull

[mike_grigsby]

After nearly dumping my 500 EL/M off a bridge while trying to use it at a high angle with the WL, I bought a PM45.

 

I don't like it nearly as much as I thought I would, and it adds far more weight to the camera than it's really worth.

 

But there are times it is absolutely indespensible. For the most part, I prefer my WL finder because it gives me a better sense of what the scene looks like.

[Ed_Ingold]

I really like the 45 degree prism on my Hasselblad. I get a clear view of the entire frame for composition, even with glasses. A non-reversed image is much easier to use than with the waist-level finder.

 

I carry a WL finder for better focusing (4x as opposed to 3x in the prism), and for shooting close to the ground. It's hard on my glasses for routine use, and hard to see the corners of the frame with them on.