Precise framing is by no means the forte of Leica rangefinders, if that's a priority, there are always SLRs with 100% viewfinder coverage.
😀 Otherwise using the entire view is sufficient.
View attachment 4883882
gif courtesy of this
site
@splitimageview: I have no idea what you're trying to prove or suggest with these crappy videos through a Leica M viewfinder. They do not respresent what my eye sees, either with or without glasses. They only suggest what the illustrations in the Leica M owners manuals show.
No one ever said that a Leica M provides the kind of viewfinder framing accuracy that a 100% coverage SLR viewfinder (like a Nikon F) does. All that I'm saying is that the 28mm frame lines are not totally without merit, they do serve a purpose and help improve framing accuracy. Period. Denying that is like saying that snow isn't cold.
When I want 100% framing accuracy with a Leica M, I fit the Visoflex 020 EVF to my M10 series bodies. (Not having had or used a Leica Visoflex optical reflex finder for a film M in perhaps 60 years, I cannot recall whether they provide a 100% coverage view or not, so I won't say that they do.) Or, eschewing a Leica M body, I use a 100% coverage SLR/DSLR or another of the many EVF "mirrorless" bodies available. Many of which are much less expensive, and have far more extensive lens options, than a Leica M and M-mount lenses.
And, that is irrelevant here. The OP was simply talking about his experience with a Leica M2 + 28mm lens and looking at another, similar solution, the Hexar AF. My response is simple: if you want to use a 28mm lens, a better viewfinder for that lens is provided in other Leica M models. If he/she prefers to consider something completely different that might indeed work even better, and at lower cost, well: go for it.
I stand by that response. You can continue to natter on about how whatever notion you're trying to promote is right or better than my statement. I no longer care.
G
