yoshimura
Member
After some hesitations, I finally got my R4A! Very good first impressions, beautiful matt black paint, splendid viewfinder until...I put a lens on it. 
. Whichever lens I use, it hides between 25% and 40% of the lower right side of the frame. This is quite a problem. I started my Kobalux 2.8/21, which I admit is a big lens, I went on with my Zeiss 2.8/25 ZM, same thing, still worse with my Konica 21-35 Dual M-Hexanon ( another big lens). I finally settled for the Konica 2.8/28 M-Hexanon, which is the less cumbersome one. All these lenses fit well on my R-D1s, whose veiwfinder is of course less wide. So, I'll see how I cope with this. Maybe just live with it and get used to not seeing the lower left part of the composition...
Plus I had difficulty in closing the back after loading the film... First time I ever see that. I am a bit disappointed to have come back to film...Has anybody experienced the same problems?
. Whichever lens I use, it hides between 25% and 40% of the lower right side of the frame. This is quite a problem. I started my Kobalux 2.8/21, which I admit is a big lens, I went on with my Zeiss 2.8/25 ZM, same thing, still worse with my Konica 21-35 Dual M-Hexanon ( another big lens). I finally settled for the Konica 2.8/28 M-Hexanon, which is the less cumbersome one. All these lenses fit well on my R-D1s, whose veiwfinder is of course less wide. So, I'll see how I cope with this. Maybe just live with it and get used to not seeing the lower left part of the composition...Plus I had difficulty in closing the back after loading the film...
First time I ever see that. I am a bit disappointed to have come back to film...Has anybody experienced the same problems?Dingo
Well-known
Your bad experience proved my theory is correct : "R2/R3 plus wide finders" is more practical than "R4 with tele finders" .
back alley
IMAGES
the r4 finder is perfect with the smaller, slower cv lenses.
the zm 25 is ok without the hood as is the 50/1.5 zm lens.
joe
the zm 25 is ok without the hood as is the 50/1.5 zm lens.
joe
Just the nature of the beast as it has such a wide finder. Of note, I find the 35 Ultron does not intrude disappointingly into the 35mm framelines. I assume that will be the same for the ZM 35. A shorter 35 would not be seen in the finder very much at all.
The R4 is a great camera for a 25 or 28mm lens, find one to mate with it to your liking and you will like the camera.
The R4 is a great camera for a 25 or 28mm lens, find one to mate with it to your liking and you will like the camera.
kshapero
South Florida Man
Whew, I think I just fine with my R3M.
mfogiel
Veteran
I have also found, that you pay the convenience of the wide viewfinder with some vignetting, so I am trying to adapt by choosing the most compact lenses. I wear glasses, so in any case I find it beneficial to use this camera, especially with the 28 mm frames, which has been the main point of buying it for me in the first place. If you consider that a good wide angle viewfinder can cost almost as much as the R4A, I think the compromise is bearable.
peter_n
Veteran
That's the way it is. The biggest lens I have on mine is a Leica 24/2.8 and I can deal with it. I think we all have different "pain thresholds" when it comes to a lens or hood blocking the VF. I was never big on accurate framing anyway...
mackigator
Well-known
Those are some nice lenses to have problems with.
puffy
Newbie
I have the same problem with the 28mm ultron, and I'm ok with it. I guess its the short side in using a camera wtih a wide build in finder.
I usually have to move the camera around a little when composing to see what's being covered by the lens. Its not that bad considering the R4 cost a fraction of the current Zeiss or Leica RF.
I usually have to move the camera around a little when composing to see what's being covered by the lens. Its not that bad considering the R4 cost a fraction of the current Zeiss or Leica RF.
peter_n
Veteran
Exactly! And welcome to the forum puffy!