Elevating the turret viewfinder

[eli griggs]

I was able to add a turret viewfinder to my Fed gear, yet to be delivered, and it is my understanding that the correct positioning of this tool is dependent on it being mounted to a fairly high RF, say the FED 5b, as opposed to the FED 2 or 3. I am wondering if anybody has made a faux mount to raise the finder for correct parallax viewing and what, if any, problems were encountered.

Cheers,
Eli 🙂

 

[Nickfed]

I don't think there should be any need to do this on any camera except possibly the early FED-2, and I've got my doubts about that as well. If you were alluding to my previous post on this matter, I was referring to the KMZ single viewfinders, i.e. not turret.

 

[eli griggs]

No, I don't think I've seen your earlier post, but I will look for it.

Which camera(s) was the turret designed for?

I think I read on one of the FSU sites that the turret was designed for a taller body camera and thus needed elevation.

Of course I may have the wrong end of the stick on this.

Cheers

 

[DaveP]

There are two different turret finders. One leans left ,the other leans right. This is to accomodate Kievs as well as Feds and Zorkis.The reason for the orientation is to not cover the shutter speed selector knob..........

 

[Nickfed]

No, I don't think I've seen your earlier post, but I will look for it.

Which camera(s) was the turret designed for?

I think I read on one of the FSU sites that the turret was designed for a taller body camera and thus needed elevation.


Cheers

I submit not. Clearly, the ideal would be to have the viewfinder as close to the lens as possible. If the camera is "tall bodied", the last thing you need is to make a bad situation worse by elevating the finder further. If you look at a picture of an early FED-2, you can see that the shoe is recessed behind the bodywork. Because of this there is a possibility that the various finders will not fit in properly. Other than that, height is not an issue. Just slide it in, and shoot.

Here is a right foot turret presumably for FED

http://cgi.ebay.com/UNIVERSAL-VIEWF...ryZ29965QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

and here is a left foot turret presumably for Kiev but presented as for FED Zorki Leica

http://cgi.ebay.com/UNIVERSAL-VIEWF...ryZ29965QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

I don't think the latter would be too good on a FED-1 but it may be OK on later models as the shutter wheel is further from the shoe.

 

[eli griggs]

Thanks for the links to the L and R oriented finders. The one I am awaiting is the right footed model.

This is the link to the page which first started me thinking about using the finder on the lower body cameras.

http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page314.htm

The authors’ section “WERE THE TURRET FINDER AND THE FED MEANT FOR EACH OTHER?” seems to me to make a pretty good argument for raising the finder for correct parallax compensation.

Of course I am still trying to learn this system without having an actual camera in hand and as I have bought a number of FEDs online, several 2s,and 3s of both types, as well as a couple of 5bs, I want to be aware of any bug-a-boos before I start to put film through any of them.

Isn’t it great that there is a forum like this to hash out what works and what doesn’t? I really appreciate and enjoy hearing different opinions on these topics.

Cheers

 

[Screwy]

Thanks for the links to the L and R oriented finders. The one I am awaiting is the right footed model.

This is the link to the page which first started me thinking about using the finder on the lower body cameras.

http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page314.htm

The authors’ section “WERE THE TURRET FINDER AND THE FED MEANT FOR EACH OTHER?” seems to me to make a pretty good argument for raising the finder for correct parallax compensation.

Of course I am still trying to learn this system without having an actual camera in hand and as I have bought a number of FEDs online, several 2s,and 3s of both types, as well as a couple of 5bs, I want to be aware of any bug-a-boos before I start to put film through any of them.

Isn’t it great that there is a forum like this to hash out what works and what doesn’t? I really appreciate and enjoy hearing different opinions on these topics.

Cheers

Aaah missed that page on Fedka , So reading that , The viewfinder is optomised for 75mm between objective and VF and the earlier cameras are on 60mm ? ,Looks like an evening in the workshop beckons making a raiser 😀

 

[Nickfed]

This is the link to the page which first started me thinking about using the finder on the lower body cameras.

http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page314.htm

The authors’ section “WERE THE TURRET FINDER AND THE FED MEANT FOR EACH OTHER?” seems to me to make a pretty good argument for raising the finder for correct parallax compensation.

Cheers

No it doesn't. I think you can write this off as essentially just so much pompous claptrap. Just because it is on the Internet, it doesn't necessarily mean it's true. The turret finders do have an adjustment for parallax but I don't think there is any great pretension of accuracy. It will be merely satisfactory at best. And as for the 1.5cm positional difference alluded to, over a distance of one metre that is a shift of 51 minutes of arc, so let's not get too precious about this. Besides, if you want to do serious work at one metre, you really ought to get off this bike and get an SLR.

All you have to do is put any camera on a box, look through the finder, stick a 1.5 cm thick book under it, look again, and then consider the difference.

Note that the turret finder is ripped off from CZ Dresden, where it was designed for the Contax. Don't ask if that's the Contax with the shoe on top of the exposure meter, or the Contax with no exposure meter and the shoe on the deck, therefore about 1 cm lower.... If I recall correctly, the parallax adjustment was no better on the original.

The para "WERE THE TURRET FINDER AND THE ........etc" may be factual, indeed the bleeding obvious, but any assertion that the finder is truly accurate (how accurate?) on taller bodies with longer lenses is conspicuously absent.

The comments about the finders too big for the shoes is correct as far as mine is concerned. I don't know why they did this. I don't think FSU cameras have undersized shoes. It isn't a great problem on the FED-1 and therefore probably isn't on anything else either.

Provided that it is in fair order, you will probably find the turret will serve you well.
I nonetheless think the individual finders are a better way to go!

 

[phototone]

I have not found the turret finder (either version) to be that accurate in framing, regardless of version, and regardless of what camera you put it on. You need to compose rather loosely.
In defense of the turret finder, I will say that it has a good clear image, and it has good eyeglass relief.

 

[Jocko]

Provided that it is in fair order, you will probably find the turret will serve you well.
I nonetheless think the individual finders are a better way to go!

I couldn't agree more - and for what it's worth, the original Soviet manual for the turret finder shows it being used on a Zorki 1 and a meterless Kiev, which argues against the "high viewpoint" theory.