back alley
IMAGES
ferider said:
rollie, i'm not anti leica and i wish anyone involved in the rf business all the success in the world. i want them all to be healthy along with the film makers also.
as long as i can shoot a film rf camera i will be happy.
joe
raid
Dad Photographer
... and I am not anti non-Leica. I just prefer Leica cameras and lenses.
Let's all just enjoy the things we like to enjoy. As long as they make you feel good about your photography, who cares what other people say or don't say.
Let's all just enjoy the things we like to enjoy. As long as they make you feel good about your photography, who cares what other people say or don't say.
BillBingham2
Registered User
It’s a double edge sword, you go with a .58 finder and you loose effective rangefinder base length. In my mind this is something that sets the M apart from the CV R systems. I love my M4-P for its ability to take moderately long fast lenses without blinking. If I went to a .58 M6 say I would not be able to handle a 105/2.5 up close wide open with as much confidence as I can today.
Having just one external finder to use for my 15mm would be wonderful, but it’s a choice I make the other way. Quite frankly I love my T and using external finders is not an issue. What was a pain for me was swapping them when I swapped lenses. I have a couple of different zoom finders but they feel very much like an SLR (tunnel vision). I like seeing around the edges, it allows me to compose pictures faster and in my mind better.
I have yet to really need to have the RF coupled on my 25/4. If I went to a ZI 25/2.8 I might want it for existing darkness that my f4 lens is not as ready for. I love my 25/Bessa L combo, it’s the ultimate hip bag street camera. After a bit of soul searching the other day I realized that I really like that medium wide range and point and shoot style. I think will help me avoid spending some money on at least the first 2 generations of digital RF bodies. It was kind of a shocking revelation for me as I love my Leicas and Nikon.
I think part of the problem with more people not going to Ms with .58 finders are the price of new ones, the fact that original owners are not letting go of them and I’m not sure how many were made (I think it’s a small number).
B2 (;->
Having just one external finder to use for my 15mm would be wonderful, but it’s a choice I make the other way. Quite frankly I love my T and using external finders is not an issue. What was a pain for me was swapping them when I swapped lenses. I have a couple of different zoom finders but they feel very much like an SLR (tunnel vision). I like seeing around the edges, it allows me to compose pictures faster and in my mind better.
I have yet to really need to have the RF coupled on my 25/4. If I went to a ZI 25/2.8 I might want it for existing darkness that my f4 lens is not as ready for. I love my 25/Bessa L combo, it’s the ultimate hip bag street camera. After a bit of soul searching the other day I realized that I really like that medium wide range and point and shoot style. I think will help me avoid spending some money on at least the first 2 generations of digital RF bodies. It was kind of a shocking revelation for me as I love my Leicas and Nikon.
I think part of the problem with more people not going to Ms with .58 finders are the price of new ones, the fact that original owners are not letting go of them and I’m not sure how many were made (I think it’s a small number).
B2 (;->
Tuolumne
Veteran
Bill,
I think the only way of being reasonably sure you get a .58 finder is to go ala carte. Although, I notice that Tony Rose has a .58 M6ttl that has been for sale forever listed here on rff.
/T
I think the only way of being reasonably sure you get a .58 finder is to go ala carte. Although, I notice that Tony Rose has a .58 M6ttl that has been for sale forever listed here on rff.
/T
ferider
Veteran
Thanks for the post, B^2, makes total sense to me.
Since we went on a Leica vs other RF tangent let me clarify my position:
It might not look like it from my kits but
- I'm not pro or against Leica; I do think new Leica prices target a completely different segment than used Leica users (like myself).
- I love handling my old M bodies. The only real thing that bothers me about them is the cloth shutter.
- I also prefer 28/{40,50} over 25/35/50 - I have no 2[45]mm lens.
Back to the R4, it is one of TWO ONLY rangefinders with 2[45]mm framelines.
With the popularity/quality of the ZM 25, and less usability of 21mm,
I have always wondered why not more people use it on .58 M bodies,
instead of the ZM full VF, from a users, not branding point of view.
Like you say, price and limited availability must be the answer.
Thanks,
Roland.
Since we went on a Leica vs other RF tangent let me clarify my position:
It might not look like it from my kits but
- I'm not pro or against Leica; I do think new Leica prices target a completely different segment than used Leica users (like myself).
- I love handling my old M bodies. The only real thing that bothers me about them is the cloth shutter.
- I also prefer 28/{40,50} over 25/35/50 - I have no 2[45]mm lens.
Back to the R4, it is one of TWO ONLY rangefinders with 2[45]mm framelines.
With the popularity/quality of the ZM 25, and less usability of 21mm,
I have always wondered why not more people use it on .58 M bodies,
instead of the ZM full VF, from a users, not branding point of view.
Like you say, price and limited availability must be the answer.
Thanks,
Roland.
back alley
IMAGES
rollie, when did you put the 'rf kits' in your sig?
i just noticed it, looks very nice.
as i shoot only b&w i see why i need less gear than you
joe
i just noticed it, looks very nice.
as i shoot only b&w i see why i need less gear than you
joe
Dingo
Well-known
Referring to the question of this thread, I have some opinions :
I think CV R2x/R3x + external wide finders is better than R4x + external tele finders, because :
1. when shooting with a 75 or 90 internal viewfinders are better because we need accurate focusing and accurate parallex corrections.
2. while shooting with wides such as 15, 21 or 25 we can scale focusing and parallex problem is less, so external finders will do its job.
3. For CV users, the 15, 21 and 25 come with external finders, so you cost less . (Also R2/3x are cheaper than R4x)
3. Some R4 users said the internal viewfinders will be blocked by large size lenses.
All these stop me from considering an R4. Just some opinions.
I think CV R2x/R3x + external wide finders is better than R4x + external tele finders, because :
1. when shooting with a 75 or 90 internal viewfinders are better because we need accurate focusing and accurate parallex corrections.
2. while shooting with wides such as 15, 21 or 25 we can scale focusing and parallex problem is less, so external finders will do its job.
3. For CV users, the 15, 21 and 25 come with external finders, so you cost less . (Also R2/3x are cheaper than R4x)
3. Some R4 users said the internal viewfinders will be blocked by large size lenses.
All these stop me from considering an R4. Just some opinions.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
With the Zeiss 25/28mm finder atop an M6 or MP, I'm ready to shoot my 24, 28, 35, 50, 75, or 90mm lenses. And if I use my 0.58 body, I even have a choice of internal vs. external finders with my 28mm. The only thing left out is my 21mm, which requires a change of finders. (Solution: leave it home.) So although the R4 still is tempting, I seem to be covered with my present gear. I resisted external finders for a long time, but since then, I have come to like them--at least the better ones.
It could be that this thread really belongs over on Tom A's area, since Tom was the driving force behind the creation of the R4. It is clear from what Tom has written elsewhere, that he strongly felt the need for a wide-angle Leica-compatible RF, without the need for external finders. In fact, it was Tom who thought of the idea of mounting a goggles on the 21mm Super-Angulon, so that almost the whole 21mm filed (22mm in actuality) became visible using the Leica's 28mm frameline. Same idea as using goggles to make the 35mm field appear within the 50mm framelines of the M3. The goggles mod on the 21mm SA was carried out by Reinhold Mueller, based on Tom's design.
So I think there is a lot of support for wanting the framelines within the camera, rather than external. No doubt this is more important for those who work rapidly, like PJ types and street photogs--those who are more apt to lose a finder in the heat of the battle--and maybe a little less critical for slower working types like myself.
It could be that this thread really belongs over on Tom A's area, since Tom was the driving force behind the creation of the R4. It is clear from what Tom has written elsewhere, that he strongly felt the need for a wide-angle Leica-compatible RF, without the need for external finders. In fact, it was Tom who thought of the idea of mounting a goggles on the 21mm Super-Angulon, so that almost the whole 21mm filed (22mm in actuality) became visible using the Leica's 28mm frameline. Same idea as using goggles to make the 35mm field appear within the 50mm framelines of the M3. The goggles mod on the 21mm SA was carried out by Reinhold Mueller, based on Tom's design.
So I think there is a lot of support for wanting the framelines within the camera, rather than external. No doubt this is more important for those who work rapidly, like PJ types and street photogs--those who are more apt to lose a finder in the heat of the battle--and maybe a little less critical for slower working types like myself.
back alley
IMAGES
the r4 was built for the cv slower, smaller wide lenses. they fit without blocking any of the finder.
for a mostly daytime street shooter it's a great marriage.
and if you're lucky, you have another different m mount body with a longer ebl and where faster, bigger lenses are not blocked in the finder.
for a mostly daytime street shooter it's a great marriage.
and if you're lucky, you have another different m mount body with a longer ebl and where faster, bigger lenses are not blocked in the finder.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
The advantage of the R4A is so when I mount a 28mm on it I can see so much more around the framelines. This to me is THE rangefinder advantage that you can see people about to walk into the frame or get a better composition due to more access to scenary information. I actually don't care to mount my Leica 21mm on the R4A since it blocks a big chunk of the finder.
ferider
Veteran
back alley said:rollie, when did you put the 'rf kits' in your sig?
i just noticed it, looks very nice.
as i shoot only b&w i see why i need less gear than you
joe
OT: Thanks, Joe. Too much stuff still, obviously, but I just finished
selling several thousand dollars worth of gear.
Cheers,
Roland.
jobo
Established
Tuolumne said:This certainly is proverbial, meaning apochryphal and probably never really happened. Come on guys - who has a coat with a pcoket that is big enough and heavy enough to put a Leica with a lens on it into? I certainly don't and don't think I ever did. Perhaps in the 40s and 50s when HCB was in his prime and fashions were over-sized and frumpy. But today? Nah!
Heh. I carry an R3A and Jupiter 9 (85mm f/2) in a jacket pocket. It doesn't snag, unlike a tiny L with a skopar and external VF