R2A/M or R3A/M for 50mm?

[tom_uk]

How much bigger are the 50mm framelines on the R3M than the R2M? After much angst I think I've decided to get one of the R2M or R3M sets from Robert White. I just need to decide which body, and at this point the size of the 50mm framelines are the most significant factor. I have no other RF lenses (at the moment).

 

[BillBingham2]

Tom,

I would go with the R3. I have Nikon RFs and the 1:1 viewing is most excellent. Very handy for stuff when you want to see outside of the frame of your finder.

B2 (;->

 

[kshapero]

No difference in the 50mm framelines of the two cameras.

 

[tom_uk]

No difference in the 50mm framelines of the two cameras.

That's a surprise..... I would have expected that with the different viewfinder magnification, the 50mm framelines would have been wider apart i.e. closer to the edges of the VF on the R3 than on the R2....

 

[DGA]

It depends on what other lenses you are about to use.
In general, the 1:1 VF on the R3x is excellent with 50mm (I have R3A+Hex 50 combo and it feels as natural as it can get)
still, if you are planning on extanding the "arsenal" with wider lenses (as I'd like at the moment) you can find youself with a bit of a problem.
If it is only 50mm and above, go for the R3A/M body.

 

[oscroft]

That's a surprise..... I would have expected that with the different viewfinder magnification, the 50mm framelines would have been wider apart i.e. closer to the edges of the VF on the R3 than on the R2....

They are, yes. And the lines are apparently slightly different too, with the corner angles shown in the R3x. You can see a comparison of the two at CameraQuest, here.
"With its large bright 1:1 VF/RF, an interesting argument can be made that the R3A has the best finder ever for 50, 75, and 90 framelines amongst film cameras" is an interesting quote from Mr Gandy.

The other advantage (other than a larger frame) for 1:1 viewfinder magnification for use with a 50 is that you see the image life size and can easily shoot with both eyes open, making yourself more aware to what's going on around you and more likely to see interesting shots. For mainly that reason (but also because it would be great for use with a 75mm lens), I've been thinking of getting an R3A for a while now - maybe this year. But if it was my first RF, I'd personally possibly go for an R2 instead to get the 35mm frame (I use 35 quite a lot) - but it would be a tough choice.

 

[jobo]

That's a surprise..... I would have expected that with the different viewfinder magnification, the 50mm framelines would have been wider apart i.e. closer to the edges of the VF on the R3 than on the R2....

You are right, the 50mm framelines on the R3 will cover about twice the (space) angle of the ones on the R2. Moreover, on the R3 it does not really matter how much is visible outside the framelines (as long as you can see them comfortably) since you can always keep the left eye open to watch the periphery, assuming you are right-eyed.

For 50mm and up, I think the R3 has all the advantages on its side.

On preview, what oscroft said.

2c, Jobo

 

[BillBingham2]

When looking at the future you might want to think about the R4X (A or M) as a second body. When combined with the R3X provides you with a powerful system very capable of handing everything from 21 to 90 without external finders.

If you only every want (or can afford) a single camera, then I would recommend you take the Anchor Lens approach. Is there a focal length that you love (70 to 90% of your shots with) or a special lens that you are buying this camera for? Buy the body that gives you the features you want most for that lens, then go from there. In the Nikon RF world, the 50/1.4 Millennium lens would be such a lens for some. Easily one of the best 50mm lenses in the world. Is the 50mm your anchor focal length, then the R3X is it.

B2 (;->

 

[silverliner]

I own both R4A and R3M but that does not stop me from wanting an R2A for real and comfortable 35 mm shooting. I don't think the RF of R3A is accurate enough, at least for the 50 Nokton that I have. The nearest and infinity focusing are O.K but something between eg. at 2-4 meters are always missed. I don't know why!!!!!

 

[Hates_]

R2 Framelines: http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigt/v-camera/rangefinder/r2a-flame.jpg
R3 Framelines: http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigt/v-camera/rangefinder/r3a-flame.jpg
R4 Framelines: http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigt/v-camera/rangefinder/r4a-flame.jpg

 

[tom_uk]

R2 Framelines: http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigt/v-camera/rangefinder/r2a-flame.jpg
R3 Framelines: http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigt/v-camera/rangefinder/r3a-flame.jpg
R4 Framelines: http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigt/v-camera/rangefinder/r4a-flame.jpg

Thanks very much for that. Based on those images, the 50mm framelines are indeed larger on the R3.

Presumably, one can assume that the whole of the R3 VF is a reasonable approximation of the field of view of a 35mm lens?

 

[Big Hairy Bee]

Thanks very much for that. Based on those images, the 50mm framelines are indeed larger on the R3.

Presumably, one can assume that the whole of the R3 VF is a reasonable approximation of the field of view of a 35mm lens?

By extension could one also assume that 28mm on the R2 would be the entire viewframe? I like 50mm and 28mm and the R4 just seems too small with 50mm.