Dedicated viewfinder for the 28mm ?

[henry_ting2]

Since I have a dedicated eyepiece, I don't need glasses while viewing

the .72 finder with a 28mm lens. However, its a real tight borderline

with hardly any eye-relief. So how many of you folks find the ,72

hopeless in such situations and use the dedicated 28 viewfinder

instead. Anybody here recommend the non-Leica version of the the 28

dedicated viewfinder?

[al_kaplan1]

I like the traditional metal Leitz bright line viewfinder. I have one .72 body (M2-R) with an M4-P viewfinder and the built in 28 frame is next to worthless. With glasses, completely worthless.

[cameron_sawyer]

Henry, my personal experience is that despite what Leica says, even without glasses, the 0.72 finder is marginal for 35mm and hopeless for 28mm. I use an 0.58 finder for 28mm and 35mm; then add the 1.25x magnifier for 50mm and up. With the 0.58 finder 28mm is comfortable without glasses, and 35mm is optimal. With the magnifier, 50mm is optimal, too, and longer lenses are more or less usable. For longer lenses one would prefer the 0.85 finder (or 0.72 with magnifier), but how many bodies should we have to own? I'm not a collector and refuse to own more than one of these pretty but overpriced dinosaurs.

 

For the 0.72 body you can buy the deluxe metal version of the VC separate finder, but separate finders are a PITA for any lens you actually focus. A 24 or 25 can be, more or less, set at hyperfocal distance and forget it, and therefore can be used happily with the separate finder, but 28mm is a different story, particularly a fast 28 like the 'cron or the Ultron.

 

I know you have a big collection, Henry, why don't you just use a 0.58 body with your 28?

 

Ah, for a RF camera with variable finder magnification. Surely Leica could manage it at this price -- say 0.50x to 1.00x with manually selectable framelines for 24 through 135. Call it the M8?

[tito sobrinho]

No! You would call it a 1957 Nikon Rangefinder SP

[henry_ting2]

Yes Cameron, I'm waiting for the price to come down on the MP.58. Then with the .85 I have and the .58, it should cover all my needs. Regarding the variable built-in finder I don't think Leica would market one. It will kill off their existing M-line nonmenclature of offering multiple models for sale. Also, there is a technical problem with a variable finder due to the existing design of the built-in finder. Even the current eyepiece is not the same between the .58, .72 and the .85, not to mention the zooming effect will introduce all kinds of distortions. The solution is to introduce a compound lens to correct this problem, but there are just too many variables and the Leica market is just too nichey and the demand is just not there to generate any profitable undertaking. Trust me, I tried a prototype and while technically viable, but surely financially inept in profitability.

[jay_.]

Regardless of the finder magnification, the 28 framelines do not show a view that looks anything like what you'd see through an SLR with a 28mm lens. The accessory B/L finder does, so I use it always with 28mm (which in my case is only on the Tri-Elmar as I sold my Elmarit when I got the 3E).

[henry_ting2]

Jay, what's a B/L finder ?

Thanks

[alan_simon]

Henry,

 

I agree with Jay-use an external 28mm viewfinder. I prefer the Leica version and have found that it works like a charm with my 28 'cron.

 

It's far less expensive than a .58 MP and can be left on the body when you are not using your 28mm lens.

 

Give it a try.

 

Happy image making,

 

Al

[h._p.]

Dedicated finder? Sod that for a game of marbles. I've got a dedicated camera for mine, electronic shutter, all the trimmings. Says Ricoh GR1V on the front and the red dot seems to have fallen off somewhere...

 

OK, OK I'm going :-)

[stephen_w.]

Henry,

 

All that gear and you don't know B/L: Bright Line Finder, generally refering to the shoe mounted ones. Although, the framelines in the camera are also called B/L.

[dave_flanagan]

Hi Henry,<p>

I use the CV 28 mm metal brightline viewfinder, and I like it. I was surprised that it is

at least a stop brighter than the Bessa R2 viewfinder, for comparison. You may have

to press your nose against the back of the camera to use it effectively, because it

does not have mm and mm of eye relief. I also like it because I can use it to visualize

a scene before I change lenses (I'm still getting used to the 28 mm

perspective).<p>

I hope this helps,<br>

Dave

[cameron_sawyer]

Well, Henry, if Solms can make the Tri-Elmar without sacrificing optical quality, I bet if they put their minds to it they could surely make a Tri-Finder. Optics is one thing where Leica has always had fantastic capabilities.

 

I think the real problem is that most of Solms' customers buy Leicas primarily because they're pretty. That understandably puts the needs of actual shooters on the back burner. Too bad.

[stephen_w.]

Cameron,

 

Leica did (still does?) recently make a tri-finder, for lenses that currently escape me...Jay?

[stephen_w.]

21/24/28 Tri-Finder

 

I heard somewhere (ebay?) of a 50/90/135 one too

[cameron_sawyer]

I meant a BUILT-IN Tri-Finder, as in 0.58, 0.72, and 0.85.

[henry_ting2]

"Well, Henry, if Solms can make the Tri-Elmar without sacrificing optical quality, I bet if they put their minds to it they could surely make a Tri-Finder. Optics is one thing where Leica has always had fantastic capabilities."

 

Yes Cameron, Leica did indeed offer an external Tri-finder. I was referring to an eyepiece element (like the 1.25 mag) that can actually zoom. If you compare how big the Tri-finder is/was, then you could see the technical difficulties of coming up with an eyepiece attachment that actually zooms. I had a prototype and I'm sure Leica can come up with one. Prototyping is one thing, and actually producing one for the market and being profitable is another. The Leica market is just not big enough to support it. It's really a question of numbers because for any sourcing of accessories (very expensive because of a Leica's niche market), the market has to have the demand. I for one really cannot complain about Leica's high-price. All things considered, I find their Tri-viewfiner cheap if you think in terms of how many of these Leica can sell.

[yong_shin1]

To Dave:

 

I am also contemplating on getting one of those CV 28mm Metal VFs. I am very much sold on their looks.

 

I am disappointed to hear that its eye relief is not good. According to CV's website, it is of high-eye point design and brags about excellent compatibility with eye glass wearers. I am rather confused here. I wear glasses and also would like to know if the CV version has rubber rim on the viewing end. Have you had chance to compare its eye relief (or for that matter, optical quality, distortion, bright line projection quality, etc.) with Leica's, new and old(metal)? In their website(CV), I also noticed that its magnification factor is x0.43. Does anybody know what magnification factor that of Leca has? I can imagine that, one with x0.58, one has to roll their eye ball to examine the whole seen. Amature astronomers call it space walk, the quality I personally enjoy (maybe not good for compositional purpose).

[cameron_sawyer]

I don't have the 28mm CV finder, but I have had a bunch of others, from 12mm through 25mm, and they are all very nice, very bright, with plenty of eye-relief.

[alejandro_quintanar]

Has anyone tried the Leica 21/24/28 finder? I just got a 21mm

and I was wondering if I should get the accessory Leitz 21mm

finder or if I should get the multiple viewfinder. For the record it's

for a m6ttl .72. If anyone has experience I'd also appreciate it.

 

Thanks

Alex

[Rob F.]

When wearing contact lenses, I have no problem with the 28mm framelines on my M4P or M6 classic. If my 28mm should happen to need to go on my M2, I just compose out to the metal finder edges, without giving it a second thought.

[tom_abrahamsson]

I have a multitude of 28 finders for my M's. The best one, by a wide margin, is the 28 Voigtlander finder, followed by the Leica 28 metal finder and the 28 Voigtlander finder for the 28 Nikon RF mount Voigtlander lens. The worst one is the 21/24/28 Leica finder. For some reason the 21 and 28 settings on this finder are useless, wild field curvature and very fuzzy image. The 24 setting is fine, but it is a large and rather clumsy piece for just one usable focal-length. I use the 0,58 finders on my TTL's when using 28mm lenses, but occasionally I stick the 28's on my M2's or M3's and then the finder comes in handy. I wear glasses and it took a long time to even find the frames for the 28 on my M4P's in the 1980's! It is interesting to note that my Nikon SP's from 1959 and 1962 have perfectly usable 28 finders and it took Leica until 1981 to come up with a 28 finder in the body! The metal Leica 28 finder is very good but they are getting a bit fragile with age, the balsam glue tends to dry out and you have rattling elements inside and they are notorious for coming off the camera and, for some unknown reason, they always land on rocks or pavements with rather disastrious results. While in Tokyo in May I saw a "new" replica 28 finder (looked just like the Leica metal one) at MAP-Camera, not cheap at US$300 but just as good as the original Leica finder.

Tom A