Anyone use a 35mm lens on a M3?

[Honus]

I am curious if anyone uses a 35mm lens on a M3 without an external finder. Can the entire viewfinder frame be used to approximate the coverage? Also, would wearing eyeglasses make a difference.

I ask because the thought of the big, M3 viewfinder is tempting, but I like to use 35mm lenses as often as 50mm.

 

[richard_l]

Good question. I use the entire M3 viewfinder for my 40mm Rokkor. There's only about a 6º difference between the 40mm and 35mm field of view.

 

[photodog]

An external finder is recommended. If you don't want to spend much, you can get a Russian finder for about $30.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

I went goggly, 35/3.5 summaron.


Todd

 

[meyman]

I'm left eyed and big nosed. I can barely see the 50mm frameline on my m3. Good I don't wear glasses as I' probably need to shoot 135 exclusively.

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

Yes you can, I do.

Just use the entire viewfinder. If you wear glasses, it is slightly more difficult, but not impossible. Never had a problem with the approximation using the entire viewfinder for my 35mm lenses.

 

[xayraa33]

I didn't wear glasses, but in the late 1970s I used an M3 with a 35mm lens and w/o external finder. I would tape the gray window on the finder on the M3 , to get rid of the reflected 50mm frameline,this gave me a bit better undistracted view, not quite a 35mm field of view, but in the grand scheme of things, it mattered very little. try this trick. you might like it.

 

[terrafirmanada]

I also do the tape trick with my M3 using 35 and 40mms. I have had pretty good results, but take my glasses off whenever I am shooting. I have had a 35 viewfinder and once ran a test on a tripod with tape on the wall- about ten feet away- to coincide with 35mm framelines. Looked the same in both viewfinders. When I processed my negatives I found the area was slightly greater in the negs. Tape was visible on all four sides. There was also a slight Shift I think to the right , which I concluded must be due to parrallax.

 

[terrafirmanada]

Oh ya then I traded in the 35 viewfinder for a 40mm, and now I don't have to smush my face into my camera so much. I have a yashica Gsn accessory finder, which should be close, but have never tried it.

 

[dcsang]

I wanna go googly 😀

I've been hunting for goggled 35's for my M3 😀

I have the 40mm Nokton so it's good to know what Richard noted regarding using the entire viewfinder on the M3.

Cheers
Dave

 

[Justin Viiret]

I've got the goggled 35/3.5 summaron, too, and it's great -- performs pretty reasonably (though much lower contrast than the 40 nokton, which I've got too). Goggles work a treat. 🙂

jv

 

[Ben Z]

I have an M3 and a chrome rigid 50 Cron of the same period, which I don't ever use either without the other. I tried a 35mm viewfinder, the 35 demands more attention to focusing than a 21 and I miss too many shots going back and forth. I also tried a googled lens (2.8 Summaron) and the googles distort the view compared with a .72 finder, and make it dimmer and lower contrast. I wear glasses, thin ones (I get on ok even with the 28 framelines in a .72x body), and I couldn't see the whole of the M3 finder outside the frames. I keep the M3/50 as an historical icon which I use infrequently. My main M bodies are all M4/M6 with .72 magnification, faster loading and rewind. The M3 is a neat camera to be sure, and very well-made. But for me it's about the photography and the .72 bodies facilitate my shooting.

 

[zpuskas]

I also have an M3 and a older 35 cron. I use the entire finder..no problems I can recall.