PatrickCheung
Well-known
Hey RFF!
So I've never been one to consider an external viewfinder... I've never even used one! I started off my rangefinder saga with an M3 and a 35mm lens... I guessed framing and got comfortable with it, so I figured "pssshtt! Viewfinder shmiewfinder!"
But then the lenses started getting wider and a few bodies got switched around. I used to use a 28mm on my M5 and was perfectly happy.... but then I donated the M5 (it was a gift to me, and when I had enough to buy my own camera I passed it on to another friend in need) and replaced it with a CL and a Nikon S2... both of which have no 28mm framelines! I also shoot an M8, but the viewfinder on the M8 is probably the least reliable of the cameras I own.
Then I got a J12 35mm for my S2 and a VC 15mm for my M bodies! AND I have to worry about cropping for digital!
I'm happy with guessing 35mm, but 28mm behaves a little differently... it's wider, the compression effect is larger (at least to my eyes). 15mm is a crap shoot. It was the 15mm that made me consider viewfinders.
I've decided to acquire a viewfinder for the 15mm (I was told the VC 21mm finder is just the 15mm one with framelines... can be used on digital and film), but I'm wondering if the 28mm and 35mm ones are worth it. I've got a whole bunch of questions...
What's the difference between a Nikon, Canon, Leica, or even FED/Zorki viewfinder?
And what about a turret finder? It seems like the Zorki/Kiev ones would work for both my 28mm and 35mm needs... but are they accurate? And does it matter which side it leans to?
Will a viewfinder made for LTM work for M?!?
My biggest concern is innaccurate framing, something I absolutely hate about the M8. I don't want to spend $100+ on a viewfinder and have misframed photos! I don't really know what to do, maybe this is just viewfinder GAS, or maybe this could benefit me alot! I don't know!
Thanks for all the advice!
Patrick
So I've never been one to consider an external viewfinder... I've never even used one! I started off my rangefinder saga with an M3 and a 35mm lens... I guessed framing and got comfortable with it, so I figured "pssshtt! Viewfinder shmiewfinder!"
But then the lenses started getting wider and a few bodies got switched around. I used to use a 28mm on my M5 and was perfectly happy.... but then I donated the M5 (it was a gift to me, and when I had enough to buy my own camera I passed it on to another friend in need) and replaced it with a CL and a Nikon S2... both of which have no 28mm framelines! I also shoot an M8, but the viewfinder on the M8 is probably the least reliable of the cameras I own.
Then I got a J12 35mm for my S2 and a VC 15mm for my M bodies! AND I have to worry about cropping for digital!
I'm happy with guessing 35mm, but 28mm behaves a little differently... it's wider, the compression effect is larger (at least to my eyes). 15mm is a crap shoot. It was the 15mm that made me consider viewfinders.
I've decided to acquire a viewfinder for the 15mm (I was told the VC 21mm finder is just the 15mm one with framelines... can be used on digital and film), but I'm wondering if the 28mm and 35mm ones are worth it. I've got a whole bunch of questions...
What's the difference between a Nikon, Canon, Leica, or even FED/Zorki viewfinder?
And what about a turret finder? It seems like the Zorki/Kiev ones would work for both my 28mm and 35mm needs... but are they accurate? And does it matter which side it leans to?
Will a viewfinder made for LTM work for M?!?
My biggest concern is innaccurate framing, something I absolutely hate about the M8. I don't want to spend $100+ on a viewfinder and have misframed photos! I don't really know what to do, maybe this is just viewfinder GAS, or maybe this could benefit me alot! I don't know!
Thanks for all the advice!
Patrick
Bigmonstertruck
Member
New to RF and Leica, so I have not used all of my equipment extensively. I have used the Voigtlander 15mm with Viewfinder on my M3 and I find it very useful and it seems to frame properly. However, if you have the lens very close to the subject (as you can with the 15mm - I am talking inches) I am assuming that framing would be off due to parallax, so I compensate a little with camera positioning and crop later. I don't have any other systems, so my experience is limited. I usually leave a rangefinder for a wider lens in the flash shoe so that if I am taking photos, say with a 50mm, and I see a shot that I think would be good for my 15mm (or some other lens that I am carrying), I can see if the shot will work before I change lenses. If you get ahold of the 15mm viewfinder, you will see that it is very difficult to visualize the results. IMHO, if you are using a wide angle lens just to get a bit more of the scenery, etc., I suppose that a viewfinder is superfluous.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Hmmm, super important No ... Waste of time/ money it depends 
I always shot my 21 SA without a VF and did Great ... No problems with what i expected to 'see' . Of course we are talking wide...so figure beyond my M4's own window
Recently i got a 21 leica VF that came with the lens and I must admit its Stellar
Love seeing a 21 perspective with it !
most of the time i just set on infinity , set aperture, view thru the vf & Click
I always shot my 21 SA without a VF and did Great ... No problems with what i expected to 'see' . Of course we are talking wide...so figure beyond my M4's own window
Recently i got a 21 leica VF that came with the lens and I must admit its Stellar
Love seeing a 21 perspective with it !
most of the time i just set on infinity , set aperture, view thru the vf & Click
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Patrick,
Fundamental for me.
Cheers,
R.
Fundamental for me.
Cheers,
R.
Scrambler
Well-known
The only external viewfinder I use is a cheapo made for accessory lenses on a fixed-lens RF: does something near 35mm and probably about 70mm. But it gives something to guess my framing from.
Can't answer your first Q: apart from some are brightline and some just use the whole frame.
The turret finder gets good reviews. The left leaning (from the viewfinder side) is intended for Leicas: more access to the shutter speed dial. Most were made for a lens-viewfinder separation roughly equal to a Leica M.
Viewfinder for LTM: Yes ... but ...
The framing difficulties you talk about are not helped by the lack of adjustment in many external viewfinders. So the closer the subject the greater the difficulties: or alternatively you have to manually correct the parallax, which involves checking the distance on the lens. And manually correcting viewfinders will differ somewhat between LTM and M, though you could work out the difference and correct.
Good luck.
Can't answer your first Q: apart from some are brightline and some just use the whole frame.
The turret finder gets good reviews. The left leaning (from the viewfinder side) is intended for Leicas: more access to the shutter speed dial. Most were made for a lens-viewfinder separation roughly equal to a Leica M.
Viewfinder for LTM: Yes ... but ...
The framing difficulties you talk about are not helped by the lack of adjustment in many external viewfinders. So the closer the subject the greater the difficulties: or alternatively you have to manually correct the parallax, which involves checking the distance on the lens. And manually correcting viewfinders will differ somewhat between LTM and M, though you could work out the difference and correct.
Good luck.
Richard G
Veteran
I use the 21 and the 18. I have a 25/28 and used it the first time I used the 28 and not once since. I sometimes use it with a 25. I like the longer ones too. The SHOOC 135 finder has revived my interest in my Tele Elmar. So much nicer framing in the SHOOC finder rather than the M6, and especially the M9. So I've just put my hand up for a SVGOO from the Classifieds for my 90. These long finders are great for auditorium shots where I want to see facial expressions, blinks etc. Composition is easier with these large bright finders for the longer lenses. I've even used the 50 with my M9 which has awful 50mm frame lines.
Spanik
Well-known
I do find correct framing important as I mostly use slides and like to project them. But those external viewfinders are a royal pita. It's that what keeps me from liking rangefinders.
kingqueenknave
Well-known
I find them to be merely important.
Sparrow
Veteran
No! ... this is the internet one must adopt extreme positions, its part of the fun
PatrickCheung
Well-known
Thanks for the info, opinions, and experiences guys!
I'm heading to Hong Kong in a few days so I think what I'll do is try and find a store that has VFs for sale and try one on my camera, see how I like it.
As of late, I've been using my cameras like Helen describes... scale focused at a certain distance, compose through VF and snap away!
From what I gather from this thread, it seems like some of you have found them to be a blessing while others a curse. Would I be wrong in assuming that those who enjoy them may have used better built (and thus more expensive) VFs, such as the Leica ones?
Anyone know how the FED/Zorki viewfinders hold up against the pricier big brand ones? They seem cheap and would be a good way to see if I find them useful!
At this point it seems like a turret finder and a VF for the 15mm is what I'm looking at.... aii so much money!
I'm heading to Hong Kong in a few days so I think what I'll do is try and find a store that has VFs for sale and try one on my camera, see how I like it.
As of late, I've been using my cameras like Helen describes... scale focused at a certain distance, compose through VF and snap away!
From what I gather from this thread, it seems like some of you have found them to be a blessing while others a curse. Would I be wrong in assuming that those who enjoy them may have used better built (and thus more expensive) VFs, such as the Leica ones?
Anyone know how the FED/Zorki viewfinders hold up against the pricier big brand ones? They seem cheap and would be a good way to see if I find them useful!
At this point it seems like a turret finder and a VF for the 15mm is what I'm looking at.... aii so much money!
its up to you to have your own values, opinions on what is worth it
but 99% of the time I get a better shot with a good external viewfinder than without it.
is the probability of getting a better pic worth the time and expense to you ?
Stephen
mdarnton
Well-known
I see a lot of pictures around that look like something the dog threw up, so that must be a popular genre. If that's what you aspire to, you don't need a finder. If, however, you care about content, framing and composition, it will go easier with the proper finder.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
If camera has frame with corrected parallax and lens is for this frame, no external VF needed, IMO.
Most of FSU and Barnaks RFs came with 50mm only internal VF, no parallax corrected.
Parallax in VF of my IIf is so bad, I'm thinking to put external viewfinder even for 50mm.
It seems to be worst comparing to my FED-2.
I guess, for UWA lens it is not so critical, just something to frame it
Most of FSU and Barnaks RFs came with 50mm only internal VF, no parallax corrected.
Parallax in VF of my IIf is so bad, I'm thinking to put external viewfinder even for 50mm.
It seems to be worst comparing to my FED-2.
I guess, for UWA lens it is not so critical, just something to frame it
PatrickCheung
Well-known
So it looks like there's a majority that are pro VF! I'm open to try...
I'm looking at a 35mm viewfinder made by Kodak for the Retina III on the big auction site right now... would one of those be useable on a Leica/Nikon body? It's cheap...
I'm looking at a 35mm viewfinder made by Kodak for the Retina III on the big auction site right now... would one of those be useable on a Leica/Nikon body? It's cheap...
raid
Dad Photographer
I love using an external finder whenever I can.
I allows me to compose easily. Sometimes, I use the finder alone and I put the camera aside for a while. I look through the small finder as I observe the world around me. Then I mount the finder on the camera and I start taking photos. Try it out this way.
I allows me to compose easily. Sometimes, I use the finder alone and I put the camera aside for a while. I look through the small finder as I observe the world around me. Then I mount the finder on the camera and I start taking photos. Try it out this way.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Yes. 35mm is 35mm. And as I recall it's quite good quality, though it's years since I had one.
Cheers,
R.
Spavinaw
Well-known
I have compared the following finders to Canon lenses on my Canon F-1:
Tewe 35-200mm
Nikon (early) 35-135mm
Acall 35-200mm
Manon 28-135mm
Voigtlander Turnit 3 35-50-100mm
Of these I found the Tewe to be the most accurate. I'd say the Nikon was next. In no case did a finder show a wider view than would be on the film. The views were either accurate or narrow. The worst case was the Manon at 28mm setting. I barely showed more than a 35mm view.
And now for the rest of the story where I have saved the best for last! How'd
you like a 28-35-50-90/100mm finder that is the most accurate I've found and CHEAP? Why is it cheap you ask. Because no one knows about it. Drum roll, please. It's a Kodak "Signet Multiframe Finder" originally for the Signet 80. Frame lines are marked for 35-50-90mm; however, using the full view outside the 35mm frame lines you get a quite accurate view for a 28mm lens. I was only able to compare the 90mm frame lines to a 100mm lens, but they agreed nicely. How cheap, you ask. Probably not over $50 on an auction site.
One negative aspect to all this is that they seldom come come up for sale and if a bunch of y'all start bidding on the next one it may not be cheap. Sorry 'bout that.
Tewe 35-200mm
Nikon (early) 35-135mm
Acall 35-200mm
Manon 28-135mm
Voigtlander Turnit 3 35-50-100mm
Of these I found the Tewe to be the most accurate. I'd say the Nikon was next. In no case did a finder show a wider view than would be on the film. The views were either accurate or narrow. The worst case was the Manon at 28mm setting. I barely showed more than a 35mm view.
And now for the rest of the story where I have saved the best for last! How'd
you like a 28-35-50-90/100mm finder that is the most accurate I've found and CHEAP? Why is it cheap you ask. Because no one knows about it. Drum roll, please. It's a Kodak "Signet Multiframe Finder" originally for the Signet 80. Frame lines are marked for 35-50-90mm; however, using the full view outside the 35mm frame lines you get a quite accurate view for a 28mm lens. I was only able to compare the 90mm frame lines to a 100mm lens, but they agreed nicely. How cheap, you ask. Probably not over $50 on an auction site.
One negative aspect to all this is that they seldom come come up for sale and if a bunch of y'all start bidding on the next one it may not be cheap. Sorry 'bout that.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Go about a quarter of the way down http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/zeiss.html for comparisons of in-camera and accessory finders. As I point out, "What is really interesting is that the 85mm frame on the ZI is identical to the 90mm frame on the MP, while the 90mm finder on the M2 actually shows slightly more than the 85mm finder on the Zeiss Ikon."
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Personally I found that owning a 25mm finder is all I really need - that one sees use for 24-28mm, while I prefer a spirit level for even wider lenses, can interpolate 35mm from a 50mm viewer, and generally screw up either the parallax or focus when shooting even longer lenses with auxiliary finder on a rangefinder, so that I am overall better off (with a somewhat boring composition, but at least in focus) with a plumb central shot composed in the main finder...
Ronald M
Veteran
I have a full set of BL finders + a CV 75. The 21 and 28 we for early M cameras. The 35 came as a package. The 50,90,135 were first used on screw mt cameras.
The 75 was bought for an M6 which has poor frame lines and it is used on my M9 now.
The 75 frame lines are still poor.
In all cases the BL has better frame lines than what is built into the M8 or M9 although I usually settle for the built in ones except for 28 & 21 .
The 75 was bought for an M6 which has poor frame lines and it is used on my M9 now.
The 75 frame lines are still poor.
In all cases the BL has better frame lines than what is built into the M8 or M9 although I usually settle for the built in ones except for 28 & 21 .