nikola
Well-known
I love lifesize VF on my new Bessa...
I have -1.25 diopter on both eyes, glasses are from normal glass (i.e. cheapest thicker than new polyglass)... and can't see whole 50mm frames (not to talk about 40mm ones), they are just slightly out of view, but that doesn't bother me so much... because VF is really great and bright and more accurate than R2a...
I like more to use camera without glasses, so I'm thinking of buying diopter correction glass for VF, which one do I need to buy?
Is existing, default one 0 or -1 corrected... if I have -1,25 would I need -1 or -2 or -3??? ...and what exact model do I need to find?
Thanks,
Nikola
I have -1.25 diopter on both eyes, glasses are from normal glass (i.e. cheapest thicker than new polyglass)... and can't see whole 50mm frames (not to talk about 40mm ones), they are just slightly out of view, but that doesn't bother me so much... because VF is really great and bright and more accurate than R2a...
I like more to use camera without glasses, so I'm thinking of buying diopter correction glass for VF, which one do I need to buy?
Is existing, default one 0 or -1 corrected... if I have -1,25 would I need -1 or -2 or -3??? ...and what exact model do I need to find?
Thanks,
Nikola
Xmas
Veteran
-1.25
Alternatively open both eyes like normal, ignore any magnification effects, should be minimal - that is why you bought the R3a.
noel
Alternatively open both eyes like normal, ignore any magnification effects, should be minimal - that is why you bought the R3a.
noel
nikola
Well-known
yes, i do shot with both eyes wide open... 
eyepiece diopters are in steps -1 or +1...
from cameraquest.com
so I suppose that I need -2 ???
eyepiece diopters are in steps -1 or +1...
from cameraquest.com
so I suppose that I need -2 ???
Max Power
Well-known
Nikola,
I've actually been hunting for the same thing. I actually bought one on eBay, for what I thought it should be, and I got it wrong.
The next step for me is to have it properly measured as indicated in this pdf from Nikon:
[URL="http://www.nikonmall.com/buynikon_assets/Eyepiece_Compatibility_Chart_040917.pdf"[/URL]
There is also something to note, that Nikon SLRs have a 'built in' -1 diopter so you have to compensate with the R3A.
One other option is to go to your local camera shop and try out a camera with a built in diopter and take the measurement from that.
Kent
I've actually been hunting for the same thing. I actually bought one on eBay, for what I thought it should be, and I got it wrong.
The next step for me is to have it properly measured as indicated in this pdf from Nikon:
[URL="http://www.nikonmall.com/buynikon_assets/Eyepiece_Compatibility_Chart_040917.pdf"[/URL]
There is also something to note, that Nikon SLRs have a 'built in' -1 diopter so you have to compensate with the R3A.
One other option is to go to your local camera shop and try out a camera with a built in diopter and take the measurement from that.
Kent
nikola
Well-known
Hehe... Max Power... 'Cause his name can be said by anyone!
This is to complicated.
The best thing would be to try them all... but.... that's not possible... so...
I'm not sure what will I get if I use to strong correction... will I lose sharpness at near... like as having + diopter... -1,25 + (+2) = +0,75 ...would that affect my picture taking?
...and why aren't they in half increments?
I'm totally confused!
This is to complicated.
The best thing would be to try them all... but.... that's not possible... so...
I'm not sure what will I get if I use to strong correction... will I lose sharpness at near... like as having + diopter... -1,25 + (+2) = +0,75 ...would that affect my picture taking?
...and why aren't they in half increments?
I'm totally confused!
jgeenen
Established
-1 and -2 both will do. The -1 should be most comfortable for your eyes.
The viewfinder is already slightly negative (about -1). This is usual - man's eye automatically corrects the difference just like focusing a nearer distance. Positive values cannot be corrected. A -2 diopter would be slightly over-corrected but is still in the range (it would appear to you as if reading books).
The viewfinder is already slightly negative (about -1). This is usual - man's eye automatically corrects the difference just like focusing a nearer distance. Positive values cannot be corrected. A -2 diopter would be slightly over-corrected but is still in the range (it would appear to you as if reading books).
nikola
Well-known
Thank you Johannes,
I'll try then -2... 'cause my sight is progressing toward bigger diopter numbers, I started with -0.5, than -0.75, after that -1 and now -1.25... this process lasts 10 years... and whenever I broke glasses doctor increased diopter by -0.25
I'll try then -2... 'cause my sight is progressing toward bigger diopter numbers, I started with -0.5, than -0.75, after that -1 and now -1.25... this process lasts 10 years... and whenever I broke glasses doctor increased diopter by -0.25
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
I really agree with Xmas. Use both eyes open. I know you already do this, and I think it's the best approach.
I too need -1.25 reading glasses but no diopter on my R3A (with 40mm lens) because I never use the viewfinder display to adjust aperture: I only ever use automatic exposure with perhaps some compensation, or use the sunny f16 method.
Also, I got some very cheap 'half frame' glasses off the shelf which let me use the glasses to adjust the controls but do not intrude when using the viewfinder. I think I paid about €2 for the glasses.
I too need -1.25 reading glasses but no diopter on my R3A (with 40mm lens) because I never use the viewfinder display to adjust aperture: I only ever use automatic exposure with perhaps some compensation, or use the sunny f16 method.
Also, I got some very cheap 'half frame' glasses off the shelf which let me use the glasses to adjust the controls but do not intrude when using the viewfinder. I think I paid about €2 for the glasses.
nikola
Well-known
I'm not sure... minus diopter means that you don't see far subjects, and plus diopter is for reading and close subjects...
My primary concern isn't reading light meter numbers in vf, but focusing... cause without glasses the rf patch is blurry... and I'm not sure if that's cause of bad focus or bad eyesight.
My primary concern isn't reading light meter numbers in vf, but focusing... cause without glasses the rf patch is blurry... and I'm not sure if that's cause of bad focus or bad eyesight.
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
nikola:
Yes, you are right about + and -, and I understand your issue with focus.
Yes, you are right about + and -, and I understand your issue with focus.
Max Power
Well-known
Nikola,
I feel your pain, I find the document hard to understand too. I think that I will just take it into my optometrist and have him figure it out
PS, I see you live in Split...AMAZING city!!! The night life in the centre of the city was great! I was lucky enough to spend a few days there for work in 2001...Someday I will go back to the Dalmatian Coast!
I feel your pain, I find the document hard to understand too. I think that I will just take it into my optometrist and have him figure it out
PS, I see you live in Split...AMAZING city!!! The night life in the centre of the city was great! I was lucky enough to spend a few days there for work in 2001...Someday I will go back to the Dalmatian Coast!