JonathanA
Member
I've been searching through the archives and (unless I missed it) didn't see anything debating the viewfinders for those who don't wear glasses. I've seen tons of discussion about how the R3A has lackluster framelines on the 40 end (and since I was thinking about picking up the 40mm Nokton it's an issue I've been wondering about.
I'm still not sure whether I'd be better off just dealing with the framelines (if they are even an issue with non-glasses wearers) or getting the R2A with a 50mm.
I guess this all stems from the fact that I'm still a little confused about the difference between the two viewfinders.
I'm still not sure whether I'd be better off just dealing with the framelines (if they are even an issue with non-glasses wearers) or getting the R2A with a 50mm.
I guess this all stems from the fact that I'm still a little confused about the difference between the two viewfinders.
K
Kyle
Guest
JonathanA said:
The main difference is the viewfinder magnification. On the R3a, the VF is 1:1, meaning everything inside the finder is lifesize. You'll get higher focusing accuracy with this magnification than the R2a's finder. The R2a has a VF mag of .7 IIRC. With the R2a finder, focusing accuracy with fast/long lenses up close will be less than the R3a. Also, on the R2a it will be easier to see the 35mm lines than the 40mm lines on the R3a. However, the 40mm framelines on the R3a are easily usable for those who do not wear glasses, you shouldn't have a problem. Of the two cameras, I'd suggest the R3a, especially since you already seem to want a 40mm lens.
Bryce
Well-known
I own neither camera, but I did look at an R3A and 40mm lens at the store. I don't wear eyeglasses, and I must say it was quite difficult to see the 40mm frameline.
I have not seen an R2A in person, so I can't comment on its framelines.
I have not seen an R2A in person, so I can't comment on its framelines.
JohnM
Well-known
I've owned the R3a and the 40mm framelines are way, way out towards the edges. Even without glasses, I had to have my eye pretty close in to see them - I can see problems for glass-wearers.
I think I would wait for some first-hand accounts from R3a owners who wear glasses before buying one.
No experience with the R2a.
I think I would wait for some first-hand accounts from R3a owners who wear glasses before buying one.
No experience with the R2a.
kshapero
South Florida Man
The R3A and 40mm is a great combo. The framelines are only suggestions. Bottom line you will great photos.
goo0h
Well-known
I have the R3A, have the 40mm/1.4, and wear glasses (nearsighted.) Around the house I will often go without the glasses, and for short distances will use the camera without glasses, but generally have the glasses on.
Without the glasses, the frame lines are pretty easily visible, but as another stated, your eye does need to be up close to the view finder. If you don't wear glasses, then I wouldn't really worry about it myself.
With glasses on, it's pretty easy to see the top frame line and the bottom markers, but I do have to move around a bit and/or press the glasses on the viewfinder to see the sides.
I too read all the discussions about it and took a while to decide between the R2A and the R3A. In the end I decided on the R3A because the 1:1 finder offered a tad bit more focusing accuracy, and since I like to shoot often in low light, figured that extra edge would be worth it to me. I sometimes forget to do it because it isn't yet automatic with me, but when I've taken the time to focus with my right eye and keep my left eye open, it actually seems faster to focus. However, it is a bit weird -- right now anyway -- to do that so sometimes I forget.
With the 50mm (Jupiter-3) lens, the frame lines are totally not an issue. I haven't had the 40mm long enough to get a feel for it, but overall so far I'm liking it and don't find it to be such a big deal that I don't always see the sides of the frame lines. Honestly, if framing is super critical to you, my personal opinion is that maybe a rangefinder isn't for you.
Actually, I try to setup and take the shot so quickly that I don't always pay attention to the frame lines anyway. (Though, I know I should be better about that!) I'm more concerned with trying to be as least disruptive and noticeable as possible, so I try not to dawdle around when I raise the camera to my eye. In fact I'm trying more and more to take the occasional shot from the waist or chest after some basic preliminary setup, like focusing at something in the same plane. (I have a LOT of practicing to do there.
)
Without the glasses, the frame lines are pretty easily visible, but as another stated, your eye does need to be up close to the view finder. If you don't wear glasses, then I wouldn't really worry about it myself.
With glasses on, it's pretty easy to see the top frame line and the bottom markers, but I do have to move around a bit and/or press the glasses on the viewfinder to see the sides.
I too read all the discussions about it and took a while to decide between the R2A and the R3A. In the end I decided on the R3A because the 1:1 finder offered a tad bit more focusing accuracy, and since I like to shoot often in low light, figured that extra edge would be worth it to me. I sometimes forget to do it because it isn't yet automatic with me, but when I've taken the time to focus with my right eye and keep my left eye open, it actually seems faster to focus. However, it is a bit weird -- right now anyway -- to do that so sometimes I forget.
With the 50mm (Jupiter-3) lens, the frame lines are totally not an issue. I haven't had the 40mm long enough to get a feel for it, but overall so far I'm liking it and don't find it to be such a big deal that I don't always see the sides of the frame lines. Honestly, if framing is super critical to you, my personal opinion is that maybe a rangefinder isn't for you.
Actually, I try to setup and take the shot so quickly that I don't always pay attention to the frame lines anyway. (Though, I know I should be better about that!) I'm more concerned with trying to be as least disruptive and noticeable as possible, so I try not to dawdle around when I raise the camera to my eye. In fact I'm trying more and more to take the occasional shot from the waist or chest after some basic preliminary setup, like focusing at something in the same plane. (I have a LOT of practicing to do there.
)JonathanA
Member
Well I haven't been too worried about the framelines but I really just wanted to make sure that it was too large of a hindrance that I would have wild composition due to it.
Thanks for all of the info and I'll probably be sticking to buying what I have originally been thinking.
Thanks for all of the info and I'll probably be sticking to buying what I have originally been thinking.
Bike Tourist
Well-known
I have an R3A and use a diopter in preference to glasses. I also use a 35mm lens on it. The entire viewfinder area approximates the 35mm frame. Rangefinders aren't that precise in framing anyway.
biomed
Veteran
I use an R3A and wear glasses. True, the frame for the 40 is hard to see, but the !:! vf is great for shooting with both eyes open.
Mike
Mike
nikola
Well-known
I love lifesize VF on my new Bessa (thanks everyone once again!)...
I have -1.25 diopter on both eyes, glasses are from normal glass (i.e. cheapest thicker than new polyglass)... and can't see whole 50mm frames (not to talk about 40mm ones), they are just slightly out of view, but that doesn't bother me so much... because VF is really great and bright and more accurate than R2a...
...I find it really nice... the ability to look with both eyes... (it requires some time to get used to... it's really weird)!
I like more to use camera without glasses, so I'm thinking of buying diopter correction glass for VF (btw how to unscrew it... counterclockwise?).... which one do I need to buy... is existing, default one 0 or -1 corrected... if I have -1,25 would I need -1 or -2 or -3??? ...and what exact model do I need to find?
Thanks,
Nikola
(thanks everyone once again!)...I have -1.25 diopter on both eyes, glasses are from normal glass (i.e. cheapest
thicker than new polyglass)... and can't see whole 50mm frames (not to talk about 40mm ones), they are just slightly out of view, but that doesn't bother me so much... because VF is really great and bright and more accurate than R2a......I find it really nice... the ability to look with both eyes... (it requires some time to get used to... it's really weird)!
I like more to use camera without glasses, so I'm thinking of buying diopter correction glass for VF (btw how to unscrew it... counterclockwise?).... which one do I need to buy... is existing, default one 0 or -1 corrected... if I have -1,25 would I need -1 or -2 or -3???
...and what exact model do I need to find?Thanks,
Nikola
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Nikola:
Like you I make photos with both eyes open and don't pay too much attention to the framelines.
The eyepiece unscrews counterclockwise. It shouldn't be difficult: mine unscrews itself and needs tightening every so often. Be careful of that. A new one is fairly expensive, almost €30 including shipping.
Correction lenses are about the same price and Robert White sells them.
Like you I make photos with both eyes open and don't pay too much attention to the framelines.
The eyepiece unscrews counterclockwise. It shouldn't be difficult: mine unscrews itself and needs tightening every so often. Be careful of that. A new one is fairly expensive, almost €30 including shipping.
Correction lenses are about the same price and Robert White sells them.
nikola
Well-known
I saw it on Cameraquest and bhphoto for 17$, don't know for shipping but it's probably 30€, final price. So I thought of ordering it from Nikon in Croatia if they have it, but I'm unsure which one do I need?
Thanks on answers!
Thanks on answers!