Best/easiest to focus rangefinder

In my limited experience, my R4A viewfinder is easily the best - it's brighter than my M6 and doesn't flare. (Mind you, I've never looked through an M3 VF).
 
No one has mentioned the Bessa T. Of all my RF's including an M6, R3A, R and a Zorkis 4 and 5, The T is the easiest to focus. I've never handles an M3 so I'm at a disadvantage there.
Kurt M.
 
The rangefinder VF I'm most experienced with is the Hexar RF's, which I like a lot. But i've used the M3 as well, and, yes, it beats it. I've wanted to try out a ZI on account of the fact that its VF has been oft-compared to the M3's.

This can be a somewhat subjective thing, since matters relating to eyesight come into play as well (and mine is anything but perfect).


- Barrett
 
aizan said:
they're all dead easy to focus, except for ones whose viewfinders are dimming with age.
Click to expand...

Replace the word viewfinders with operators and you have the other side of the problem! :D
 
Of those I've had the chance to use, I'd rank them like this:
Canon 7 (love that they say which FL that is... ;) )
Kiev 5
Leica CL A dead tie with the Bessa
Bessa R
Yashica GSN
Kiev 4
ZI Contessa (small but well defined)

I've only handled a M3 that needed a CLA so the fact that I was unimpressed is probably not too meaningful.

William
 
I hate to focus and 90% of the time gotta "snap and run" anyway as I take street photos in camera-shy Korea. I favor short lenses, small aperatures for deep DOF, pre-focus, then shoot.
 
Of those I use or have looked through, the ZI is best by far, apart from the fact that at times you can get lost as to which way to turn the lens to make the images match, so it is not necessarily the fastest.
 
M3!! I love my M6 and it´s much easier to focus than say my BessaR or the FSu stuff I own but with the M3 it was like the focus was "snapping" in. has to be experienced to believe.
 
Of my RFs:

M4 > 7 > P > Z4 (excellent viewfinder after I cleaned it) > S2 (yellowish) > Contax IIa > Contax III > Fed2 > IIIf/IIIc (but the SBOOI for a viewfinder is top notch) > IVSb

Actually, I think for the RF I prefer the separate RFs of the IIIf/IIIc above the small RF patch of the Fed2 and the Z4.
 
Can only evaluate what I have and used so... M5 is the nicest of the traditional .72 Leica finders, all the information is there, shutter speeds, meter read out and area covered, and the most flare-free (maybe its the light gathering window design and/or the glass piece that was eliminated with the M4-P and M6 and changed to plastic with the MP ?).

And the 'new' Nikon SP 2500 ( slightly brighter than an 'aged' SP and with modern glass coatings ) for its true 1:1 life size, flare-free, clean uncluttered without extra frames using a 50mm and 'zoom' frames as needed, the inter one is always right without guessing. Also, its rangefinder patch may not be as bright as the Leica's but also seems to blend in and makes the total image look more natural. Using the 1:1 factor and both eyes open 'brightens' the image ( compensating for the slightly dimmer finder ) and you can superimpose the frames on the scene without eye fatigue. Although not as bright as mentioned I've never had a problem with focus even in dim light. The extra 'wide-angle' finder for 35/28 gives a reduced image size and is very bright and easy to see with out scanning the outer area of the frame. Am I the only one that thinks this?
 
Last edited:
My Nikon S2. Vievfinder not as bright as the m3, but a very clear focus point, very contrasty. the leica is brighter but the focus point is not as clear as on the nikon.
2nd best: OM2 with 1.2/55 (oops, no rangefinder...)
 
If focussing alone is the consideration, then any camera whose R/F is as bright as it was designed to be should be as good as any other -- the only possible difference being V/F magnification.
 
I think any camera with a clearly delineated RF patch (Leica M mounts, Hexar RF, Bessas, Zeiss Ikon) wins over other cameras, whether or not the others have a 1:1 finder. Of these, then, I'd have to say the M3, because of its high magnification. But I must point out that the Hexar, even with its low magnification, is right up there because the RF patch is exceptionally bright and exact overlap of the images is very easy to see. I haven't tried any of the .72 magnification Leicas.
 
I guess I'm old fashioned,but Canons from the VT to the VTDZ and the L's in between get my vote when set on RF. But when I've fitted beam splitters cut from Canonet glass to screw Leicas, wow, there really is a contrast.
 
I find my Bronica RF645 far easier to focus than any of my 35mm rangefinders.
The normal vertical (portrait) orientation requires less peripheral eye shifting, too.

Chris
 
I would say the Hexar AF. Very easy to focus (it is AF after all) and the frame lines compensate for parallax and magnification. If you are not looking for a electronic rangefinder, then I found the Mamiya 6 has an excellent optical rangefinder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom