r4a suited for 35mm focal length?

[meandihagee]

i want to use a 28 or a 21 with the r4. but i also would like to have an option for the 35 as an all-round lens.

as i read the brightlines of the r4 for 35 are a bit hard to work with.

also i'm guessing that the metering will be kinda difficult. since the r4 measures the entire frame in the case of a 35 the frame will be what, 50% of the whole viewfinder?

i don't really want to buy the r2, because i'll end up with a viewfinder attached on top for 28 or 21.

what to do, what to do?

 

[rover]

The 35mm lines on the r4 are about like the 50mm lines on a Leica M finder. It works well for me.

 

[Keith]

I quite like a 35mm on the R4 also ... lots of space around the frame can be a bonus sometimes.

 

[wgerrard]

I agree with Keith. The 35mm frame on the R4 is easy and comfortable to use.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I had no problems either--I recommend the combination.

 

[Tom A]

I often use the 35 on the R4M's that I have. It is comfortable enough. The 50 frame is puny and I regard it as an emergency frame only. The combination of a Biogon ZM 21f4.5 and a Nokton 35f1.4 is compact enough to work as a carry around kit.
The 28 frame is glorious in it's solitary splendor - no other frames to muck up the view.
It is still one of the "land mark" cameras for Rangefinders in my opinion.

 

[KenR]

35mm lens lines are fine and focusing seems accurate on my R4A. Its the 50mm lens lines and focus (at f/4 and below) that are difficult. For me, the camera is meant for a 28mm lens = perfection.

 

[peter_n]

Agree with Ken, that solitary 28mm frameline is really great. But like the others above, I never had a problem using a 35mm on my R4.

 

[kshapero]

How about using the 50mm frameline?