Inaccurate framelines on R3A?

[tempest68]

I was using my Sony A7S to dial in my off camera lighting before taking the picture with my Voigtlander R3A. I was using the 50mm FE f/1.8 on the Sony and CV 50mm Heliar f/2 on the R3A (not that what lens mounted on the Voigtlander really matters for viewfinder differences). I was a little thrown off by how the 50mm frame lines framed the shot tighter on the R3A vs. the A7S. In order to try to figure out which camera seemed to be off, I then compared the 40mm frame lines on the R3A to the framing of my Canon EOS 3 with the Cannon 40mm f/2.8. And once again, the R3A was a much tighter framing.

The difference was enough compared to both other cameras that I am questioning if the viewfinder in the R3A is inaccurate.

Has anyone else done a comparison of their Voigtlander R framing vs. another camera they own and seen a big difference?

Is there any simple way to adjust how the frame lines work in the Voigtlander?

I shoot with it so rarely that I never noticed that I am probably getting more in my shots than I framed at the time the picture was taken. But I wanted to start using it more. And now I'm concerned because I want the framing to be as accurate as is possible with a rangefinder.

 

[Mjd-djm]

I love my Bessa R3a. Best thing is to try not to worry about things like this. By the time you actually see the film images you will have forgotten how you framed it. I have shot loads of rolls and never noticed any issues. Just use it and enjoy!

 

[bluesun267]

There's nothing wrong with your R3A. This is common to Leica M as well...(more so on the later models after the M4-2). Also I've found it to be the same on the Canon 7 as well as all of the cheaper fixed-lens RFs (Yashica Electro, Canon QL17 etc). The most accurate frame lines are in the M2/M3 (but they are still tight).

Film camera framelines are sized for (approx.) 95% coverage at the closest focusing distance. When shooting at average distances, or especially infinity, the difference between field of view captured on the full width of a 35mm film frame and the frameline view is quite large. For instance, the 35mm frameline coverage on an M6 is much closer to a 40mm field of view at infinity.

I wish it weren't so, as I love to print full frame from 35mm negs. But I guess the thinking with film cameras was 'better safe than sorry'--in deference to the fact that most machine prints (and slide mounts) crop a moderate to significant amount from the full frame.

 

[Doug]

Part of the issue here is that the lens angle of view changes as it's focused; the closer the focus the narrower the angle seen and vice versa. This is visibly evident with cameras with through-the-lens viewing like a mirrorless or SLR. With these kinds of camera viewfinders you see pretty much what you'll get, though even here the view is often less than 100%

Some fixed-lens rangefinder cameras have framelines that expand and contract as the lens is focused, as well as shifting down/right and up/left to help with parallax errors. Fuji GS645S is an example from my experience. But interchangeable lens RF cameras have only the parallax feature, leaving the framing more or less accurate at only one focus distance. It's the nature of RF cameras, might as well get used to it! 🙂

 

[bluesun267]

Some fixed-lens rangefinder cameras have framelines that expand and contract as the lens is focused, as well as shifting down/right and up/left to help with parallax errors. Fuji GS645S is an example from my experience.

Yes, I forgot about those rare cameras that have expandable and parallax corrected framelines. The Konica Auto S2 and the Konica IIIa have that feature as well.