putting up with goggles

[FrankS]

It really seems like a kludge, initially a necessary evil to get 35mm lenses to work on an M3. To those people using these lenses with googles (on M2,3,4,and 6), do you get used to them? Or are you constantly thinking that a goggle-less version of the lens would be so much nicer?

 

[RichardB]

I have both goggled versions of the 35 and 135 for my M3 and newer ASPH for my M7's. No problem with either!-Dick

 

[raid]

I love the goggled lens for what it is, Frank. It does not bother me. The look is unique on the M3. It radiates "power" [kinda].

 

[Al Kaplan]

They're great on the 135/2.8 but I hated them when I had a 35/1.4 with them.

 

[waileong]

You can live without goggles on the M3 if you are willing to use the entire frame and assume a little loose cropping. You can even get a 0.8x mini-fier to help shrink the view to approx 35 mm.

 

[Nando]

I have a goggled Summaron f2.8 and I've never been bothered by the view. I just find the lens a bit awkward to store in my man-purse.

 

[raid]

You can live without goggles on the M3 if you are willing to use the entire frame and assume a little loose cropping. You can even get a 0.8x mini-fier to help shrink the view to approx 35 mm.

Wouldn't the RF be working incorrectly without goggles?

 

[colyn]

Wouldn't the RF be working incorrectly without goggles?

Goggled lens are calibrated to be used with the goggles so removing them would cause focusing issues..

 

[benno]

You'll definitely have focus issues without the goggles.

I for some reason find mine a bit more tolerable with the lens hood fitted - it's quite a fetching look actually.

But the piss poor viewfinder drives me up the wall.

 

[shadowfox]

Not to slight anyone here who loved the look and the functionality, but the goggle is what turned me away from M3.