Anupam
Well-known
Hello,
Does anyone have any information on the effective RF baselengths of some of the popular fixed lens RFs like the Canonet QL17, the Minolta Hi-Matic 7sII and the Olympus RC and RD models? I can't seem to find any information. Any subjective views on rangefinder/viewfinder clarity and usability would also be welcome.
Thanks,
Anupam
Does anyone have any information on the effective RF baselengths of some of the popular fixed lens RFs like the Canonet QL17, the Minolta Hi-Matic 7sII and the Olympus RC and RD models? I can't seem to find any information. Any subjective views on rangefinder/viewfinder clarity and usability would also be welcome.
Thanks,
Anupam
Anupam
Well-known
Hmmm, anyone?
januaryman
"Flim? You want flim?"
I'm not that interested to do the legwork, and no offense, but have you tried looking at http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
or just googling these cameras?
or just googling these cameras?
Anupam
Well-known
januaryman said:
Yes, I have googled them to bits but no one seems to bother about the viewfinder magnification or baselengths of these cameras like they do for "real" rangefinders. That is strange, especially with the fast lenses on these very capable cameras.
-A
januaryman
"Flim? You want flim?"
That IS odd. I just assumed the "encyclopedia" type sites would break it all down for you. Sorry this was of no help. I can tell you that focusing the Canonet is a breeze and I seldom miss in getting sharp pictures. Here's a link to all my Canonet shots if you'd like to see how I managed with it: http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=canonet&w=36584127@N00 - never used any of the other cameras you list.
ampguy
Veteran
I would find this data interesting. In addition to baselength, the magnification factor of the VF would be needed as well. It would be difficult to find many fixed lens rf's that didn't meet focusing criteria as measured by the calculations used in the thread for removable lens rf's.
It's interesting to note that Minolta offered up it's 90/4 Rokkor with the very short baselength CL which close up and wide open should not-focusable or a significant focusing challenge, yet some users go to 2.8/90s, and others have issues wtih 40/1.4 and 40/2 which the current calculations show should be easier to focus than 90/4.
My personal experience with the Canonet, XA, and GSN is that the focusing patch is relatively small to most LTM or M mount bodies, so independent of baselength, that is an issue for focusing these fixed lens RF's.
It's interesting to note that Minolta offered up it's 90/4 Rokkor with the very short baselength CL which close up and wide open should not-focusable or a significant focusing challenge, yet some users go to 2.8/90s, and others have issues wtih 40/1.4 and 40/2 which the current calculations show should be easier to focus than 90/4.
My personal experience with the Canonet, XA, and GSN is that the focusing patch is relatively small to most LTM or M mount bodies, so independent of baselength, that is an issue for focusing these fixed lens RF's.