External Viewfinders: Expensive v. Cheap

[35mmdelux]

Ive seen some nice external VFs like the Zeiss and the 21-28mm Leica. Some less expensive ones too. Some say get the cheaper lens (when appropriate)and splurg on the VF.

Please help me understand the reasoning here. Why buy the more expensive Zeiss when the VC or Ricoh will do? Is there that much of a diff?

TKS.

 

[JRG]

"Some say get the cheaper lens (when appropriate)and splurg on the VF."

I guess I'd have to argue the opposite way: Splurge on the lens, make do (if you have to) with a cheaper external VF, until better days cone along.

I've used the Zeiss 25/28 VF, and it's superb. But I've also used the CV 25 VF, and I could certainly live with that. You're not going to get exact framing from an RF viewfinder, internal or external. You can learn to work with what your VF provides. The lens quality does matter, now and then.

The only reason I sold my Zeiss VF is that I came across a Bessa R4M for about $50 more than I had in the VF. So, for $50 more, I got a nice internal VF with several framelines, along with an attached film transport, shutter, and decent meter. It seemed like a bargain at the time, and I haven't used external VFs much since then.

 

[Rayt]

In general I don't like external finders because it makes the camera about an inch taller and when the camera bag is tight that makes it tighter. I don't expect RF viewfinders to be accurate anyway so I tend to guess. I may leave a 28mm Leica finder on the camera and also use a 21mm or 24mm lens with it and just guess wider.

 

[35mmdelux]

Ive got a .58 mag which would be an easy guess with a 24mm lens. A 21mm lens would be a bigger stretch. TKS.

 

[Al Kaplan]

I had a 21 Leitz finder that I got cheap because it had a cracked front element. It also had a habit of falling out of the camera's shoe and I lost it, but I got maybe five year's use out of it. I replaced it with a plastic Cosina Voigtlander finder which I really like but it broke off near the top of the foot. Now I'm trying to decide whether to replace the finder or sell my 21/3.4 Super Angulon which I rarely use anyway, or just work with my 15mm finder and guestimate coverage with the 21mm len.

Framing with a rangefinder camera is largely intuitive anyway, and I use the finder more for aiming than composing.

 

[Rayt]

Too bad the 21-24-28 filter was so huge. The tunnel vision of that finder helped me keep the camera level just by making sure the black areas surrounding the view are about even.

 

[BillBingham2]

35D,

A lot depends upon your approach to how you shoot. It can change from aming with wide angle street shots to composing with teles and ultrawides.

I've spent a LOT of money on finders over the years and found that matching the finder to the lens (e.g. distortion) is important for me some times, other times less. The BIG multi lens finders mess up the reason I love RF, small in size. They make a M2 look like a Nikon FTn (not to say an FTn looks bad, but the Leica is no longer a Leica IMHO).

I love Bright Line finders and have paid BIG MONKEY bucks for good ones. I found they are worth their weight in gold. Clear, bright and easy to see through in any lighting condition. In existing darkness some of the barrel finders are worthless.

Most Zoom finders are OK if you have young eyes, but again, YMMV.

B2 (;->

 

[presspass]

I enjoy the Zeiss finders but I also use a Contax 21 finder. The Zeiss finders tend to stay someplace safe and the Cosina ones go to fires and bad weather events. No matter how good the finder, I have never been able to get the exact framing an SLR offers.That's not what a rangefinder is about.

 

[payasam]

JRG talks sense. The lens, not the finder, takes the picture.

 

[peter_n]

Agreed. Finders are going up in price too. The little CV 28/35 is now $200! I find for anything wider than a 28 having a finder makes me comfortable so I have 24mm and 15mm finders for my two widest lenses.

 

[newspaperguy]

The only add-on finder that ever really worked for my old eyes
is the Voightlander Kontur - sorry, only ever found it in 50mm size.

 

[back alley]

i don't mind an external finder but then i really liked the infinity locks on my old canon lenses.
i just received my rd1 finders for the 15 and 21 lenses and am looking forward to using them.

the zeiss finders are like magic, so bright and clear and in a league of their own but the cv finders are usually miles ahead of most of the older finders that are around.

better to spend more on the lens though.

 

[rickp]

on an m8, for wide angles, i use a plastic leica 21 for a 16mm distagon, and a ricoh 28 (made by CV) for the leica 21mm. the zeiss and others are verrrrry nice, but the two i have are good enough for the purpose. i also have a deposit on the new CV zoom viewfinder, which will be useful for analog and digital m cameras (and the epson which i don't have). for focusing, i normally leave the megaperl 1.35 magnifier on the camera all the time. it's particularly useful for the 50 and 75 but, because of the external viewfinders, i don't need to remove it for the wide angle lenses. PS. i'd vote for spending more on lenses than viewfinders.
greetings from hamburg
rick

 

[kywong]

I do find that I take many more photos with a camera with a big and bright finder than one with a small and dim one. More keepers too!

It is probably because I try to visualize what would the result look like before I press the shutter, and if what I visualize is crap, I won't take the photo, and with a small and dim finders I would start visualizing crappy, small and dim photos.

However, I'm comparing a Nikon D70 to something like a EOS 30V or my Leica M, it could be handling, or mood, or luck, who knows? I don't have much experience with external finders apart from the CV 28/35 on my DP1.

That said, it does sound peculiar to have a finder that is more expensive than a lens.

 

[notturtle]

Sure, lenses take the pictures and not the finders, but the finder is what you look through to enable you to take the picture you want.

If the finder is crap it will get in the way one way or another. The CV finders I think are superb value for money.

I would prefer to use a very good lens with a very good finder than a superb lens and a crappy finder. Thankfully, CV make enough that one does not have to fork out silly money for Leica finders, which are ridiculously priced. The Zeiss finders I hear are incredible but I have never peered through one.

 

[TJV]

I love using finders for 28mm and wider, even on a 0.72x mag leica body with internal frame lines. I prefer the older Leica SLOOZ over the metal CV finders, providing the former is a good example. There's less distortion with the SLOOZ but man, the CV finders are bright!

Having said all of that, I'd prefer a great 28mm lens without an external viewfinder than compromise and get a good one of each.

 

[35mmdelux]

If I got a Zeiss finder and a CV 21mm, then the finder would cost more than the lens! Go figure.

 

[TJV]

It is crazy when you think of it like that. You've got to wonder where the money is going, especially since I assume Cosina actually make the Zeiss viewfinder?