Best viewfinder for 111c?

[Dave16]

Hi.

I have a wartime 111c with 3.5cm Elmar which I want to start using

more.

I need to improve viewing with this set-up.

 

What do forum contibutors think is the best value viewfinder?

The new Voigtlander 3.5mm, or the old Leica 3.5mm.

I can also get a Vidom universal viewfinder for under ?30.

 

Thanks for your advice.

 

Regards,

david

[simon_bruxelles]

The Leitz finder is the most appropriate and would probably be the best but is so expensive it will probably cost you more than the camera. I use the black plastic Voigtlander 35 which works well and is not overly expensive. The Vidom reverses the image which takes some getting used to and most of those encountered are less than perfect optically.

[robweatherburn]

Try a Russian made Turret finder - works well - allows adjustment for distance, and interchangable lenses. Works well for me.

 

Rob

[awahlster]

Another excellent low cost finder is the ones made by Canon the chrome one would look pretty good on your IIIc and has built in parallax adjustment. The black and chrome is newer slightly brighter but harder to find and mosre expensive. Still less then $100.00 make sure you get the one with the parallax adjustment as some are made to fit the New canon RF's with a pin that adjsuts the finder and that style wouldn't work as well on your camera.

 

I have both and really like them

 

do a search on ebay they pop up a lot.

[steve salmons]

I had a similar problem a while back as I needed a 35mm finder for the

Summaron on my IIIf. I eventually decided the Leica version (SBLOO I think) was way too much and went for a chrome metal Voigtlander finder from Stephen Gandy at Cameraquest.Not cheap but nothing lke as expensive as the Leica. Also it is small,wonderfully bright and still easy to use even though I wear specs.I found it an ideal solution. The multi finders like VIOOH etc always seem a bit bulky to me.

Good luck, Steve

[gene_e._mccluney]

I like the Cosina/Voigtlander 28/35 Minifinder. In chrome. It just looks "right" on the IIIc,

and it has good eye relief for glasses wearers.

[jtk]

I have an SBLOO on my IIIC, shooting only a Summaron 3.5. Superb lens, very sharp stopped down a little...the SBLOO is a joy to use... a combo made in post-Nazi heaven. But I'm anxious about losing the finder when I carry it: $$$.

 

If you don't treasure the SBLOO/IIIC as a collectors item, and I wish I didn't, you might be better off with the CV.

 

An "L" of thin steel or brass could be screwed onto the top of the accessory shoe to hold the finder more securely ... without modifying anything or drilling any holes. Maybe I'll do that.

 

Loss is also a risk with my CV 25 finder (plastic), which is not held as securely as the SBLOO is due inferior accessory foot industrial design ... don't know if they did better with the 35 finder.

[jtk]

...I have the following tube type finders, excellent condition:

 

A PAIR of chrome Canon finders 35 & 100, per Mark's description)...

 

A PAIR of Nikon same-design-as-Canon chrome w/black-face finders, 35 & 105 with individual leather cases.

 

send an email if interested...won't separate the pairs...

[feli]

I prefer the VIOOH to the VIDOM, because it shows the image right side up and properly

reversed. Look here: www.ritzcam.com

[dan flanders]

Old Oskar designed a compact, ergonomic and pocketable camera, so why cobble it up with a bunch of appendages?! If you just have to use a dedicated VF to visualize the scene, why not carry it separate in your pocket, use it off the camera to compose, and then shoot with the VF that is built into the camera? The camera will then slip into a jacket pocket without the likelihood of snagging, and you won't develop a paranoia about losing an expensive VF. As to parallax; it's a red herring! All you have to do is center your aim an inch or so up or to the left and shoot away! The SLR revolution of the sixties brainwashed several generations of camera users into thinking they just had to see the total scene on the viewing screen or in the VF. Compose your scene the way your EYE sees it and the camera will follow suit!

[jerry_lehrer]

Harry,

 

You would use the 50mm finder in the camera to compose for the 35mm

lens that is on the camera? YMBOOYM!

 

Did you not read his entire message?

Jerry

[dan flanders]

Perhaps I was not as clear as I intended. Irrespective of which lens is on the camer I rarely mount the auxiliary finder on the camera, but rather compose the scene with it in hand, select an aiming point, and shoot using the built-in finder. If I am using the FSU turret finder it is set for the chosen lens. If using the 50mm lens I am usually satisfied with the built-in finder because I have pre-visualized and composed the scene prior to mounting the camera. It is not difficult to learn the limits of each lens used so it is easy to compose the scene without the use of the finder. Anyone can do it, it just takes a little practice.

[dan flanders]

BTW, one doesn't actually compose the scene anyway unless you are able to move things around or order subjects to assume positions. What you actually do is select the framing that fits the components of the scene already in place. In the event of moving subjects, you wait until they are where you want them before exposing. Photography doesn't need to be a static proposition; it can be as dynamic as you have the imagination to anticipate the scene and allow it to develop. Knowing the acceptance angles and framing limits of your lenses frees you from slavery to the viewfinder.

[jcgoodman]

Hello David, and everyone. How about trying the pre-war/wartime vintage folding frame-finder,

("RASAK")? I often use a chrome one on my wartime IIIc. The complete frame-finder has a

removable mask, but even if this is lost, the 3.5cm frame remains. Yes, this finder makes the

camera less-easily stowable, but you'll be picking up the advantages of 100% light transmission

through the finder, with a natural-size field of view. Looks great on the camera.

[tim_franklin]

Agree with Harry. Its perfectly feasible to shoot without the auxiliary finder in place. I did

so with the 24mm Elmarit on my M3 a few years ago; admittedly that was because I had a

Leicameter in the shoe at the time, but the technique Harry describes works fine in my

experience.

[Dave16]

Thanks everyone.

I already use the camera with the built-in viewfinder for portraits, and I'm happy with that, but would like to start shooting architectural shots using the 111c, and I want to take my time composing them - hence the need for a viewfinder.

 

I think I'll look out for a 2nd-hand Voigtlander viewfinder, and see how that goes.

Great advice everyone.

Very much appreciated!

Regards,

david

[dan flanders]

". . . and I want to take my time composing them - hence the need for a viewfinder." <p> All the more reason for pre-conceiving the scene. Use the VF to determine the limits and find reference points, but learn to evaluate the scene before you even begin to sett the camera up to record it. Actually these are not separate operations, but just phases or components of the holistic experience. You want to photograph a scene because first your are impressed by its beauty or lack thereof; then you try to capture it for future enjoyment or contemplation. Once you free yourself from the tyrany of the viewfinder it is a good bet that the overall quality of your images will significantly improve.

[Dave16]

Thank you Haryy,

 

I'm sure this is good and useful advice, and it certainly gives me something to think about!