Brightline finders on a M6ttl ...

[Steve Karr]

Hi everyone,
So I was wondering if there is a problem using add'nl finders with the M6ttl? Some info. on the web said the 2.5mm extra height would be a problem, causing framing to be off. I have a VC 35mm now & would love a 50mm & a 135mm. But before I buy anything I wanted to ask... I live in an anti-Leica state so I can't try it out first.

And what do you feel about the Leica vs. others in the finder world ? The Leica 5cm's are sweet, but the VC I have now is nice too. They are about the same price, so ...

Thanks!
Steve

 

[roundg]

The accuracy of Framing is not important on a RF. I have never compare a CV50mm VF with a Leica's, though I once owned them both. I never noticed the different between the view I saw and the output photo.

The CV 50mm is almost a clone of the leica's.

 

[BillBingham2]

Steve,

Shane is correct, it's not a problem. If you want a 100% accurate finder get a Nikon F, F2, F3. Not sure about the other Fs but I do think the D3 might also be 100% too.

Some bright line finders have parallax adjustments on them. Canon went through a stretch where they made some world class BL finders too. There are other good ones out there, right now I only have a CV 28 Metal and a plastic 25. The 28 is on my Ricoh GRD I and the 25 comes out on my S3-2000 when I use my CV 25.

B2 (;->

 

[maddoc]

I use external VF with my IIIf (CV 50mm and 28/35) and also with my M (21mm). Never thought about the different height of the shoe-mount with respect to the optical axis and never had a problem with framing.

 

[TJV]

The CV 28mm metal finder is pretty accurate with my M4-P. The little close focus marks are a little off but close enough. On my M7 the close focus marks are quite a way out, which I suspect will be the same with your M6ttl.

Actually, I'm not a big fan of the CV 28mm metal finder. I like the 35mm metal finder, but the 28mm one has less eye relief and it's harder to see the outside or edges of the frame. I'd love a proper Leitz SLOOZ. Was thinking the Zeiss 25/28mm finder would be best but then got to thinking the view is obviously more cluttered with lines which defeats part of the purpose for me for using the 28mm finder.

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

Steve,

Shane is correct, it's not a problem. If you want a 100% accurate finder get a Nikon F, F2, F3. Not sure about the other Fs but I do think the D3 might also be 100% too.

Some bright line finders have parallax adjustments on them. Canon went through a stretch where they made some world class BL finders too. There are other good ones out there, right now I only have a CV 28 Metal and a plastic 25. The 28 is on my Ricoh GRD I and the 25 comes out on my S3-2000 when I use my CV 25.

B2 (;->

f4, f5, f6 too 😉

 

[jonmanjiro]

f4, f5, f6 too 😉

Yep. Most of the flagship F series and D series Nikons (F, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, D2X, D2XS, D2H, D2HS, D3, D3X) have 100% finders.

Though I just discovered that the D1, D1h, and D1X finders only had 96% coverage!

 

[raydm6]

I am partial to the Leitz BL finders. I use a 5cm SBOOI on my IIIf and a 135mm SHOOC on my .72 M6 Classic. I can't speak for the extra height of the M6 TTL but like the others, I compensate a bit when framing to account for parallex - especially close focusing - with the SHOOC (which also has the adjustment ring).

If you are shooting 135mm, the SHOOC (like all the Leitz BL's) is wonderful to look through and it makes me want to use my Tele-Elmar more. There are a few versions out there and mine is the more recent dual-scale version (feet and meters on the parallex ring). There's one on pnet right now for sale (looks mint and w/case) and of course you can find these on the auction site as well.

Here's a pic with my M6 to give you an idea... (the SBOOI is on the IIIf and an SGVOO for 90mm on the left):

Have fun!

- Ray

 

[TJV]

I have this finder [to use with 28mm lens] and it is really bright with sufficient eye relief to use my glasses comfortably. Brightline clutter is not bothersome a year after buying it - my brain seems to ignore the 25mm brightlines. Also - the view is much wider than 28mm, adding to the ease of framing.

At close distances, I try to remember to favour what's in the lower part of the viewfinder, allowing for parallax. Minor thing.

That's helpful, thank you. I've never looked through the 25/28, just the Zeiss 18mm finder, which was superb. If you have time do you think you'd be able to post a quick sketch of the frame lines of the 25/28? I'm wondering how it is arranged and what the different focal length lines are drawn like.

Thanks again.

 

[Benjamin]

100% is like, whatever.

That said, there is nothing wrong with getting close to the picture you want. It is almost certainly better to start with the most accurate Frame that one can, before having to deal with the limitations of the RF system and indeed our relation to it.

 

[Rob-F]

I use auxiliary finders a lot, with 50, 35, 28, and 25mm lenses on my IIIc; and with 24 and 21mm lenses on my M bodies. I can agree that given the approximate nature of rangefinder work, framing is no more of a problem with them than with the built-in finder. The M6 framelines, whether TTL or not, are undersized for shots at normal non-close distances.

What I don't see coming out here is why you want to use auxiliary finders for focal lengths for which the M6 TTL has built-in framelines. You've mentioned 35, 50, and 135mm lenses. all M6s have 35 and 50mm framelines, and all but the 0.58 model have 135mm framelines. I'm not saying there isn't a reason to prefer the aux finders; but what underlies your interest in them?

 

[TJV]

Personally, I like using a 28mm finder on my 0.72 bodies because I find the 28mm framelines too cramped and I like to see outside the frame. For everything else I'd use the internal lines.

I use auxiliary finders a lot, with 50, 35, 28, and 25mm lenses on my IIIc; and with 24 and 21mm lenses on my M bodies. I can agree that given the approximate nature of rangefinder work, framing is no more of a problem with them than with the built-in finder. The M6 framelines, whether TTL or not, are undersized for shots at normal non-close distances.

What I don't see coming out here is why you want to use auxiliary finders for focal lengths for which the M6 TTL has built-in framelines. You've mentioned 35, 50, and 135mm lenses. all M6s have 35 and 50mm framelines, and all but the 0.58 model have 135mm framelines. I'm not saying there isn't a reason to prefer the aux finders; but what underlies your interest in them?

 

[Steve Karr]

Finders ....

Finders ....

Well thanks everyone. I guess 100% viewfinding accuracy is not ever possible, even with SLR's, but I have a M6ttl .85 with a magnifier to help focus/shoot wide open and that makes it hard to see the 5cm lines. Thought it may help.
But thanks again & if there are any cheats to make the 5cm work a little better please share!

Steve