manual film slr with brightest viewfinder:

The OM viewfinder is big for sure, for me, almost too big. I had to wander my eye around to see everything...which can tire the eyeball.

R5/6/7 are all good and bright.

FE2 is auto exposure, if that matters, btw. Of course you can shoot it manual too.

Ditto with Aria-auto or manual. I have a Contax ST also, the Aria is a tad brighter but not worth quibbling over.

One thing is for sure: these old SLRs are SO MUCH BIGGER-NICER in the viewfinder than crop factor DLSRs...I can hardly use one of those.
 
Does it have to be manual advance? The Contax RX is amazingly bright. As for a full manual camera, I think the Pentax LX might have the brightest finder.
But the LX, Nikon F2, Nikon F3, Contaxes, OM2, Canon F1 and the Leica SLRs are all very top tier cameras which would probably need a direct side-by-side comparison in a blind (pun intended!) test to see if there is any difference that would actually affect your workflow.

I'd love to participate if someone can gather all these gems together in one place so we could all look and see!

Phil Forrest
 
Leica R8/9, R6.2 and the SL/SL2. Super bright and great contrast. Things just snap in to focus, especially with the SL.

I own all of these and several Nikon bodies (F,F2,F3,FM)
The canon 1v was also very bright.
 
Another I've read about but yet to hold is the Bessaflex TM (Made by Cosina)...it's a 35mm Manual no frills M42 body that is very pretty...not too many out there...................someday...
 
I got a OM2N in the mail today. I like it a lot (a bit small for my hands, need to try a Bessa grip even though that's not a perfect fit), but the viewfinder is not mind-bogglingly bright. Less bright, IMO, than a F100 (though that was w/ a 1.4 lens rather than 1.8) but brighter than a D700. I don't have any manual SLR experience for comparison.
 
I'm posting this here rather than the obvious place because there has been a bit of mention in this thread about camera batteries and the 'old" 625 1.35v Mercury batteries. This information might be useful to some who have not yet stumbled across it.


I have found two good units that allow you to use SR44 button batteries, or LR44, if you must.
The first, and most expensive, is made in Japan and sold by "The Small Battery Company" in London as their MR-9 Adaptor. It's a very well made unit with a proprietary case but cost me Pounds Sterling 32.43 which is AUD $50 on today's exchange rates. Not cheap. A company named CHRIS in USA sells the same MR-9 adaptor for USD$ 36 plus postage. I didn't buy from them at the time because there was no detail available about it.
There is a small potential problem with it in that the diode is sealed inside a false bottom to the casing which results in the unit being slightly deeper than the PX625 battery cell it replaces. If the battery compartment is too "neat" a fit for the original battery then the MR-9 will not fit. It's not a problem in my Nikkormat, for example, which has a large enough battery compartment and a spring loaded contact in the base to accommodate slight differences. But it could be a problem for some other equipment like some hand held exposure meters, I'm told. Anyway, it's expensive! For that reason, although I originally bought an MR-9, I went looking for something that wouldn't give a "fit" problem and to suit the second Nikkormat body I have.

The ones I've ben getting are made by Franz de Gruiter in Holland. He uses original battery casings which he machines out and he fits the diode into a small cutout in the rim of the casing where it is visible and does not require any extra depth. He can only make them as he gets hold of suitable battery casings to use and so delivery sometimes runs into weeks. He charges EUR16.00 including postage which works out to AUD $20. A much better price! If you order more than one he'll send them in separate envelopes to ensure they arrive OK. He also sells kits or has instructions for those who want to DIY.

His email address is <battery.adaptor@orange.nl> but does not have a website.
If you want a very complete run down on battery replacement options go to <http://www.butkus.org/chinon/batt-adapt-us.pdf> where you will find details of Franz's offering and many others besides. It downloads as a pdf file. Franz's ordering and other details are on page 11. It gives a lot of information as to why the Wein-type hearing aid batteries aren't a good choice.

Both manufacturers send a fresh SR44 battery with their adaptors. I still have a couple of the now-banned PX625 Mercury batteries that I got when travelling and working in China where they continued to be made for a time and have checked the adaptor units against the originals - the meter reads the same.

Hope this is of interest when talking older SLR's and other battery powered equipment. By the way, the Small Battery Company lists a lot of other battery sizes, not just the 625 replacements.
 
A vote here for some unsung (and inexpensive) heroes: the Minolta X-700 and X-570. The magnification is not quite as high as the OM-1 (0.90x vs. 0.92x) and the coverage is slightly less (95% vs. 97%) but they are similarly huge, bright and clear. The OM-40 also had a 0.92x VF but with 93% coverage. I found the OM-1 much superior to the R9 which has similar coverage but only 0.75x and a strange bluish tint (at least on the example I used)

Any of these old MF 35mm SLRs leave even the best (or most expensive if you prefer) DSLR viewfinders in the dust. The current DSLR champ (if that's the right word) is/are the Canon 1D series which all have 0.76x magnification with 100% coverage. The FF Nikons are pretty ordinary with 0.72x max for the D700 and 0.7x even for the new D4. Personally I find the magnification more important than a couple % coverage but that's just me; that's why I find the 1.0x 7D and 0.94x D300 viewfinders better for manual focusing than the larger but lower-mag D700. However, looking through any of these cams is a pretty miserable experience after playing with one of my old Minoltas :(
 
the OM-1 is big, and bright.

however, like all SLRs, I have a really hard time getting accurate focus on them. So I am not so sure that the biggest and brightest is really what you want. I have recently gone to the microprism center over the prism/rangefinder screen or the 1-10 I have around but to be honest I wish I could find an SLR that I can focus as consistently as my M2 because it would most likely save me an assload of money.
 
I must say the Contax Aria probably gets my vote. I've had a lot of SLRs but it stands out. R9 had a beautiful finder for manual focusing, though not the brightest I've seen.

Contax ST also has a super bright and large finder.
 
I've tried lot's of SLR's in a quest for the easiest to focus and brightest finder and without a doubt it's Leicaflex SL and SL2.
here's the list I have had and compared to,
OM1
OM1n's various
minolta srt's various
pentax me, mx, k series and spotmatics
Canon AE1 and AE1 program
Nikon FM, FM2n, F50, F60, F90x
F , F2 (all finders) F3, F4, F5, F100 and D700
Nikkormat's (all)
Leica R4, R8
Contax 139
probably more but forgotten!

Harry Lime say's it right. It's not just about brightness, it's contrast and the way the focus appears. The original Leicaflex is definately the brightest. Clear glass screen with a central microprism spot but IMHO a pain to focus.
The SL and SL2 have full screen microprisms which make the image seem to pop in and out of focus much better than the others on my list. I've tried a Nikon H2 full microprism screen in my F and F2 but it's not in the same league as the SL and SL2.
I believe the prism's were silver coated which makes for a bright finder. Later replacement ones are aluminium coated and not as bright according to others but I haven't used one.
 
Never looked through an SL/SL2, but many seem to find their viewfinders bright. The OM-2 is pretty bright, but my Canon F-1N beats all my SLRs
 
Contax RTS III gets my vote in the Best View category. For manual focus, brightness is good but other factors apply, too. The big RTS has a lot of glass in that prism, and premium optics. The result is uniform illumination across the view, and precise focus on the groundglass right into the corner. Magnification (.74x) is sacrificed for the 100% coverage and long eyepoint. Love that 1990 display technology!

vf-rts3.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom