40mm 1.4 w/ R4 (35mm) lines...Viable?

[loslosbaby]

Do you think that the 40mm could be used (with testing and training) with the 35mm lines, or do you think I'm deranged?

I'm making the R3 / R4 decision, and "which accy viewfinder?" is part of that. I'd love to roll without a VF at all in common usage...don't want to drop/scratch/destroy it.

Thanks again in advance!

G.

 

[oscroft]

Do you think that the 40mm could be used (with testing and training) with the 35mm lines, or do you think I'm deranged?

I've heard quite a few people say they successfully use a 40mm lens with the 35mm lines in a number of cameras, so I don't see why it should be any different with an R4. In fact, I intend to do exactly that myself as soon as a CV 40 makes it to the top of my "things I can currently afford" list (after a couple of recent photographic purchases, it's a pretty short list right now)

 

[sienarot]

Well, if you're deranged, you're in good company here. Many people use the 40/1.4 with the 35mm framelines, including myself. I actually find the 35/2.5 a bit wider than the 35mm framelines, whereas the 40mm seems to fit it better for non-close up shots.

 

[Thardy]

I use a 40mm lens with the R2a which has 35mm and 50 mm lines. The 35mm lines seem to work well enough.

 

[foto_fool]

I have permenently parked my 40 Nokton on an R3A. I wear glasses and can't see the 40 framelines - even the 50's are tough. Don't seem to have any trouble composing though - the 1:1 magnification, both eyes open is a joy to use. Get the R4 if you have/use the shorter focal length lenses.

- John

 

[Terao]

I use the 40 on my R-D1 with the 35mm framelines, just get used to using the outside of the framelines, no problem whatsoever. 40 is easily my favourite non-specialist lens.

 

[Tom A]

Using the 40f1.4 on the R4M (R4A) is no problem. Click in the 35 frames and use the inside of the frame lines as a guide and you are pretty well covered. The 50 frame on the R4 is small, really small, but the 35 is comfortable. I have had the R4M since March this year and conservatively I have put close to 200 rolls through it. Lenses from 21 to 50, but mostly the 21/25 VC-P lenses and currently the 21/4.5 Biogon. I did some rolls with a 50/1,4 ASPH wide open and with the 40f1,4 wide open and found that with the 50's you have to be careful when you focus. The short rangefinder base does not tolerate sloppy focus. With the 40 (with the 35 frame) it was much easier to "hit" it right. I have also found that the 21/40 combo is a great 2 lens/1 body city shooting package.

 

[PetarDima]

Using the 40f1.4 on the R4M (R4A) is no problem. Click in the 35 frames and use the inside of the frame lines as a guide and you are pretty well covered. The 50 frame on the R4 is small, really small, but the 35 is comfortable. I have had the R4M since March this year and conservatively I have put close to 200 rolls through it. Lenses from 21 to 50, but mostly the 21/25 VC-P lenses and currently the 21/4.5 Biogon. I did some rolls with a 50/1,4 ASPH wide open and with the 40f1,4 wide open and found that with the 50's you have to be careful when you focus. The short rangefinder base does not tolerate sloppy focus. With the 40 (with the 35 frame) it was much easier to "hit" it right. I have also found that the 21/40 combo is a great 2 lens/1 body city shooting package.

Again, very impressed with Tom's comments 🙄
I have same doubts about my R2M ... how correct focus will be with f 1.4 lenses?
( 50mm or 40 mm ??? ) I think that 40mm + 21mm is perfect street combo 🙂

 

[oscroft]

I have also found that the 21/40 combo is a great 2 lens/1 body city shooting package.

Interesting - I've lately been walking around Bangkok with my R4A and 21/50 CV lenses and thinking what a fine city shooting package that is 🙂

 

[payasam]

Petar, focus should be fine with any R/F coupled lens. As for the original question: there's little difference between the field of view of a 40 and that of a 35, and viewfinders are hardly known for accuracy.