How usable are 28mm framelines in 0.72 viewfinders?

[bigglesworth]

Hi there,

I'm in the market for a new-to-me Leica. Currently I shoot with an MDa paired with an Elmarit 28mm. I received the lens in a trade and bought the MDa on a whim as it was listed for dirt cheap. Prior to using this combo I had been wanting to jump into the Leica system, and having had some experience with it I now know that the 28mm focal length is a great fit for the style of photographs I want to make.

I've been having a blast with this setup, I fashioned a DIY external viewfinder by gluing a viewfinder from a broken point&shoot to a handcrafted steel hot shoe insert. This setup works well and I have enjoyed using it so far, however, it relies purely on zone focusing and I would like to be more free to shoot at wider apertures.

I would love to hear about the experience of those of you who shoot 28mm lenses on 0.72 Leicas. Having done a fair amount of reading and research there seems to be a split consensus about the usability of the 28mm framelines. Many people report not being able to see them clearly (even non-glasses wearers), while others say they are fine or suggest just using the edges of the viewfinder as an approximately accurate frame.

I'm looking to buy either an M4 or an M4-P but if the edge of the 0.72 viewfinder basically approximates the 28mm frameline, then I'm tempted to just buy an M4 rather than an M4-P (for economic and maybe aesthetic reasons) if they are functionally the same when using a 28.

Any input on this would be greatly appreciated, apologies for the wall of text!

 

[bigglesworth]

Here's a photo of what I'm currently running, for the curious, or anyone wanting a quick laugh!

 

[Nitroplait]

I wonder what was done to the chrome to make it look like that? That must have been the reason for being "dirt cheap".

Anyway - it sounds like you have already done your research and have read all the arguments for and against. I don't know if there is much else to say, but here's my view:

I use a 28mm on my M6 and M2 and it works fine for me - I wear glases and will have to move my eyes around to see the frame edges on the M6, but I don't need to consult the framelines every time I take a photo. So I don't really think it is a matter of "can see" or "can't see" but more a matter of how you photograph.
If you ask me if I can see the frame lines while wearing glases, the answer is both "no" and "yes, if I move my eye", but more importantly; I don't look at the lines so it doesn't really matter.

 

[Rob-F]

I used a 28mm Elmarit on my M6 non-TTL for a while. I focused first, then took my glasses off to use the viewfinder. I could see the 28mm framelines well enough that I had no problem framing a shot. Today I use my 28mm on a 0.58 body, which makes things more comfortable and convenient. If I were to use my 28mm today on my M4P or other .72 body, I'd use a 28mm auxiliary finder, again, for convenience and viewing comfort.

 

[johnny.moped]

On a .72 Leica basically the whole viewfinder ist 28mm (more or less). So it's pretty easy as you actually don't have to focus on the frame lines - just on what you see / don't see through the viewfinder.

 

[Bill Clark]

I’ve often wondered if these cameras, like yours, were used a lot less than a regular camera, one that has the view finder. I don’t much pay attention to the frame lines as it’s probably just what I do when making photographs. I do own a nice M3 that I really enjoy and it only has frame lineds for three lenses, 50, 90, 135.

Thanks for showing your photograph.

 

[Rob-F]

I’ve often wondered if these cameras, like yours, were used a lot less than a regular camera, one that has the view finder.

Probably they were not used much in place of the M2/M3/M4, because they were meant for use mostly with the Visoflex mirror housing; and for microscope photography. You didn't need or use the viewfinder for such purposes.

 

[Rob-F]

The M1 was nice. It had a viewfinder with 35mm framelines and no frameline selector or rangefinder. Depth of field with the 35mm Summaron was good enough that you could scale focus well enough; and with lenses wider than 35mm, scale focusing is that much easier. It was especially a good match for the 21mm f/4 Super Angulon, with which it is hard to take an out of focus shot! Besides, the M1 still looked like a Leica, which the MD does not!

 

[bigglesworth]

I wonder what was done to the chrome to make it look like that? That must have been the reason for being "dirt cheap".

Anyway - it sounds like you have already done your research and have read all the arguments for and against. I don't know if there is much else to say, but here's my view:

I use a 28mm on my M6 and M2 and it works fine for me - I wear glases and will have to move my eyes around to see the frame edges on the M6, but I don't need to consult the framelines every time I take a photo. So I don't really think it is a matter of "can see" or "can't see" but more a matter of how you photograph.
If you ask me if I can see the frame lines while wearing glases, the answer is both "no" and "yes, if I move my eye", but more importantly; I don't look at the lines so it doesn't really matter.

Perhaps fine sandpaper? Guesswork on my part but the end result is a lightly scratched but very polished looking Leica. The previous owner definitely had a bit of fun with it. He even hand crafted metal substitutes for the film advance and rewind that mimicked the form of the Leica prototype designed to accompany the moon landing. For $175 I couldn’t be happier though, especially in this market!

Thanks very much for your two cents, that is very pragmatic and intuitive advice.

 

[David Hughes]

...For $175 I couldn’t be happier though, especially in this market!

I wish you hadn't mentioned that.

Regards, David

 

[das]

I find that for the price of any good Leica-branded 28mm M lens, you can buy a top of the line Contax SLR and a 28mm f/2.8 Distagon and have no issues with framing.

 

[bigglesworth]

I wish you hadn't mentioned that.

Regards, David

In my defense, I have spent an ungodly amount of time refreshing and scouring my country’s buy and sell site!

 

[Deleted member 65559]

Biggle, since you mentioned looking for an M4 or M4-P, having used M's (except the M7), I'd take the M4 every time, especially since the prices of M4-2/M4-P have skyrocketed. I prefer the more minimalist framelines, not to mention the brass top cover instead of zinc w/ black chrome.

 

[rhl-oregon]

Tamarkin Cameras has a useful chart comparing M framelines through various VF magnifications. The chart probably exists elsewhere in webworld, but if you view it at Tamarkin maybe (felix culpa) you’ll find yourself buying an M4 from Dan.

 

[Nitroplait]

I’ve often wondered if these cameras, like yours, were used a lot less than a regular camera, one that has the view finder. ...

I own a MDa which basically looks mint except for the bayonet mount.
It was used in a laboratory for microscope work and had never seen the outside of a building before I bought it, but the mount is the most worn I have ever seen - and I own professionally used Nikon F's and F2's.
Sherry Krauter didn't think it was necessary to replace the mount, but I think it may possibly be the one of all my cameras that has seen most film go through it in it's lifetime.

 

[oldwino]

I think your current setup is pretty good.
I use a 28 occasionally on my M2, and I have trouble seeing the whole viewfinder, and I have modified the viewfinder a bit (it’s got a M4 mask in it, supposedly better), and I don’t wear glasses. I find an external VF much nicer to use.
To me, 28mm on a Leica M is just outside the useful range of the camera’s basic design. It really is, for me, a 35-50mm camera, with even 90mm a compromise requiring a eyepiece magnifier.

 

[Ccoppola82]

I use a 28 on my m6 just fine. If framing is critical it does take an extra second to move the eyes around to the frame edges. But then again, how accurate are leica frame lines anyway? I never actually tested it but since it’s not TTL, I suspect that it isn’t 100% accurate. I wears glasses btw

 

[Deleted member 65559]

The framing can't really be inferior to most SLRs with viewfinders showing anything less than 100%? The thing i always wondered about Elmarits was why they had to be so big? The Canon 25mm LTM and decades later the M Rokkor 28, and the Voigtlander 28mm 3.5 strike me as a better ergonomic match to an M camera. I know that's why, way back when I chose to use an M2/35 Summicron as my standard combo.

 

[das]

I remember reading somewhere that Leica 50mm frameline accuracy is about 93%, which is not really competitive with better SLRs. I can't imagine that a Leica 28mm is even as accurate as that. And a Leica VF fails to show the curvature inherent in 28mm and wider lenses. It's almost like you have to get 50% closer to your subject to get what you initially see in the VF. I agree with many that Leicas are not ideal for the focal length, although it works and can of course produce good results

 

[rfaspen]

The lens on that MDa is an absolute cracker! Very nice.
The body has been through some stuff... No strap lugs ... filed off it looks.
I have an MDa and sometimes use it with a 21 or 15mm lens. Fun.