Slr to use with glasses

[skahde]

First question: What's your prescription? Any Astigmatism? If not, Nikon's finders come with a plain glass but the finder is minus one (-1, virtual picture at 1m). Correcting eyepieces come with the number of the resulting power. The 0 eyepiece is the right one for presbyopia, puts the virtual picture at infinity. That is what I use on all of my Nikons. If you need a different prescription get this exact power in a correcting eyepiece. If you think the F3 is too big for you, a FE2 or FM2 is less in the hand but honestly, if I want to have a light and small camera I grab my Minox 35 GTE, not one of my Leicas.

 

[Darthfeeble]

I had the same problem when I had a Leica. My solution was to get contact lenses, I made the mistake of thinking I needed near vision corrections to see the viewfinder but it turns out that the frame lines and the focus patch all were clear with the distance Rx and not with the near. Oddly, the view of the rear screen was also good with the distance contacts but not with glasses. ??

 

[Freakscene]

True: the Contax Aria has 7% more mag than the F3HP, yet the same eye relief.

The ME Super (or MX) have nearly life size magnification, quite easy to focus. But I have to press my eye close to the eyepiece to see the entire view, no way to see the entire view with glasses.

The viewfinder of the Aria is extraordinarily good, but: perfect combo film reflex and street photography and note the review by @das

I always end up saying this, but anyway, autofocus SLR viewfinders look very bright; their focusing screens are comprised of bonded bundles of fibre optics with microlenses on each end, but this makes them harder to focus manually - each microlens has its own focal length and the image is projected with more apparent depth of field. A screen designed for manual focus has more focus snap and it is easier to tell when the image is in focus.

And remember what we like will vary between individuals.

 

[Streetmaniac]

Thank you all for the very interesting suggestions. It seems that i am not the only one having this problem. I have changed many cameras over the years. I started with the pentax mx and the 50mm 1.7. i didnt know anything else so i accepted it as it is. The photos were never sharp. I changed to the nikon f3hp with 50mm and i was happy cause i could see a lot but the focus wasnt perfect. The weight made me hate it cause at this size i cant accept focus problems, after all it was a professional model. I changed to a canon p. I loved it with 50mm but with this camera i discovered street photography and opened a new pandora box. 50mm was too tight and i couldnt see the framelines of 35mm even when moving my eye around. I sold it and didnt regret it. I started saving for a leica m4 with a 35mm lens and then i tried it before buying and good i did so. I read this old forum page and the guy who tested all those camera sure was in a huge rabbit hole that i dont want to fall in. I will try the slr suggestions and will conclude if one of them is ok for me. I was also thinking of a bessa r, since the magnification is smaller..

 

[CMur12]

Yes they do, to a certain extent, but there are a few cameras that break the mold or balance the compromise, the Leicaflex series being one of them. If you reduce viewfinder magnification too much, you get trouble focusing. Ergo, the problem the OP had with the Nikon F3HP. Especially for wide angle lenses, that make everything in an SLR viewfinder smaller. I can attest to that, having owned multiple SLR's searching for the one with eye relief and ease of focus. I once had an R7 and an F3HP at the same time, and just the 5% more viewfinder mag of the R7 made it a lot easier to focus. Again, a balance, and the cameras that hit that balance well are, in my opinion, cameras like the Leicaflex SL, Nikon F, Canon Ftb, Minolta SRT. I raised a similar question 16 years ago on the old photo.net forum here https://www.photo.net/forums/topic/403355-eye-relief-best-mechanical-cameras/. Especially look at Peter-de-waal data and comments in that thread.

I heartily agree that the Minolta SR-T cameras allow viewing of the whole screen with glasses on.

I've always been able to focus any camera, so I'm not sure what to recommend to the OP.
In the case of the Minolta SR-Ts, the 101 and most of the 201 had the older style of focusing aid, with the finer micro-prism center and fine-focusing donut around it. The finer micro-prism didn't black out quite as quickly with slower lenses.
The SR-T 102, 202, and the very last 201 all had the more modern focusing aid with the split-image center and the coarser, snappier micro-prism surround. These were generally quicker to focus.
Note that with any such focusing aid, especially with slower lenses, the focusing aid can "black out." To get the most out of all such focusing aids, the eye must be perfectly centered. If you experience the blacking out, move your eye (usually slightly downward, in my experience) to clear the aid.

Later Minoltas, such as the electronic X-700, X-570, and X-370, had Acute-Matte focusing screens and multi-coated mirrors. These were very bright and contrasty, and very easy to focus. Minolta even licensed the Acute-Matte technology to Hasselblad. These cameras had greater viewing magnification, but with my eye-glassed eye properly centered, I can just see the edges of the screen. I have to move my eye to see other displays in the finder.

In my experience, unlike Disappointed Horse in post 4, I can't see the whole finder of a Pentax Spotmatic through glasses. I have the same problem with the Olympus OM-1 and with Nikon's FM, FE, FM2, and FE2.

- Murray

 

[skahde]

I loved it with 50mm but with this camera i discovered street photography and opened a new pandora box. 50mm was too tight and i couldnt see the framelines of 35mm even when moving my eye around. I sold it and didnt regret it. I started saving for a leica m4 with a 35mm lens and then i tried it before buying and good i did so.

If 35 mm and street is the problem maybe the solution is not what you think. Have you tried scale-focussing and accessory finders? That's what I use for the 2.8/28mm Biogon on my M4 and I get consistently more keepers than with the Nikon F3 with the 2.8/28 mm AIs, for whatever reason.

 

[steveyork]

Thank you all for the very interesting suggestions. It seems that i am not the only one having this problem. I have changed many cameras over the years. I started with the pentax mx and the 50mm 1.7. i didnt know anything else so i accepted it as it is. The photos were never sharp. I changed to the nikon f3hp with 50mm and i was happy cause i could see a lot but the focus wasnt perfect. The weight made me hate it cause at this size i cant accept focus problems, after all it was a professional model. I changed to a canon p. I loved it with 50mm but with this camera i discovered street photography and opened a new pandora box. 50mm was too tight and i couldnt see the framelines of 35mm even when moving my eye around. I sold it and didnt regret it. I started saving for a leica m4 with a 35mm lens and then i tried it before buying and good i did so. I read this old forum page and the guy who tested all those camera sure was in a huge rabbit hole that i dont want to fall in. I will try the slr suggestions and will conclude if one of them is ok for me. I was also thinking of a bessa r, since the magnification is smaller..

Bear in mind, maybe a reason "focus wasn't perfect" on an SLR was because of shutter vibration. I once made the mistake of zooming in on two pictures, made at the same time, the same subject, same lighting, same aperture, shot one after the other, same film, developed in the same tank -- one with an SLR with a modern, stopped down one stop, aspherical lens, and the other with a Leica M, with a 50 year old lens, wide one. One of the reasons I sold the SLR's after that. Shutter vibration on an SLR is real.

 

[Cascadilla]

Bear in mind, maybe a reason "focus wasn't perfect" on an SLR was because of shutter vibration. I once made the mistake of zooming in on two pictures, made at the same time, the same subject, same lighting, same aperture, shot one after the other, same film, developed in the same tank -- one with an SLR with a modern, stopped down a little aspherical lens, and the other with a Leica M, with a 50 year old lens, wide one. One of the reasons I sold the SLR's after that. Shutter vibration on an SLR is real.

Shutter vibration is certainly real, and some SLRs are better than others for that. I shot Pentax MX bodies for years and eventually upgraded to LX bodies. One of the bonuses was being able to routinely hand hold 1/15 with the LX that I almost never could with the MX. I haven't used enough other brands to know how they perform on this point, but I have no doubt that some models are better than others.

 

[38Deardorff]

Thank you all for the very interesting suggestions. It seems that i am not the only one having this problem. I have changed many cameras over the years. I started with the pentax mx and the 50mm 1.7. i didnt know anything else so i accepted it as it is. The photos were never sharp. I changed to the nikon f3hp with 50mm and i was happy cause i could see a lot but the focus wasnt perfect. The weight made me hate it cause at this size i cant accept focus problems, after all it was a professional model. I changed to a canon p. I loved it with 50mm but with this camera i discovered street photography and opened a new pandora box. 50mm was too tight and i couldnt see the framelines of 35mm even when moving my eye around. I sold it and didnt regret it. I started saving for a leica m4 with a 35mm lens and then i tried it before buying and good i did so. I read this old forum page and the guy who tested all those camera sure was in a huge rabbit hole that i dont want to fall in. I will try the slr suggestions and will conclude if one of them is ok for me. I was also thinking of a bessa r, since the magnification is smaller..

"i cant accept focus problems, after all it was a professional model"
If you can't get photos in focus with either the F3 or the Pentax......it's not the camera......

 

[ChrisPlatt]

OP asked about an SLR - not a rangefinder camera - so I will not recommend one.

The Nikon F3HP should have worked for you. Which focusing screen were you using?

A pro SLR with sports/action finder is a possibility, but would be larger than one with standard finder.

Chris

 

[zane0777]

How about a waist-level finder?
Waist-level finder SLRs

 

[Streetmaniac]

"i cant accept focus problems, after all it was a professional model"
If you can't get photos in focus with either the F3 or the Pentax......it's not the camera......

I know it is sure something wrong with me and how i focus but for example with the canon p i could focus perfectly.

 

[Streetmaniac]

OP asked about an SLR - not a rangefinder camera - so I will not recommend one.

The Nikon F3HP should have worked for you. Which focusing screen were you using?

A pro SLR with sports/action finder is a possibility, but would be larger than one with standard finder.

Chris

I wouldnt be negative with a rangefinder camera if i can see the 35mm framelines and better a bit outside of them.

 

[boojum]

Matt Osborne (Mr. Leica on YouTube) recently posted a video of M accessories he uses, and one he mentioned were thread-on viewfinder diopters. Here’s the video link:

I got that diopter adapter he recommends. It works great but be warned I believe the outer lens is plastic. I used a micro-fiber cloth to clean it and scratched it. Yes, I am trying to get another. But, remember that the "action" part of the image you shoot is not at the edges. Unless you are deep into landscapes ad architectural it carries little weight. The part you can easily see around the center usually tells the story just fine. As always, YMMV.

 

[CMur12]

Just thinking out loud:

I know that an SLR's central focusing aid can black out, with slower lenses, if the eye isn't positioned just right. Could eye-position also affect focusing accuracy in the case of certain individuals?

A highly respected member of this forum once told me that he could never get accurate focus with manual-focusing Minolta SLRs. It seems there is some other variable at play here. Could it be eye position?

- Murray

 

[splitimageview]

With an SLR split image prism, each half is sending a different bundle of rays toward the eye. When the eye is off-center (away from the ideal exit pupil) one half may entirely blackout. Or you'll see uneven brightness between halves. Or see a false-looking alignment because you’re only sampling part of the light cone.

The split image in this case can look aligned when it’s actually slightly off, or look misaligned when it’s actually correct. In this case especially when shooting wide open there could be focus errors.

I have found the K3 screen that came with the FM3a is the best for not blacking out. Prices for these screens are sky high on the bay! The K2 screen that came with the FE2 is nearly as good.

 

[Streetmaniac]

Your comments made me think a lot. I tried today the pentax a super of my girlfriend and i tried putting my eye a bit down than usual trying to meet the focusing circle and the focusing was a bit better but had to squeeze my eye in the viewfinder. I will try to find the cameras you mentioned to try them live out since i dont really prefer a brand. I noticed also that the lines moving from the upper line made it a bit difficult too. Maybe i should check some other king of focusing screens too.

 

[skahde]

I have found the K3 screen that came with the FM3a is the best for not blacking out. Prices for these screens are sky high on the bay! The K2 screen that came with the FE2 is nearly as good.

I found the 1.2/50 mm AIs was easier to focus with K2 than with the K3 which I got when they were still plenty available for reasonable prices. The increased transparency of the brighter screen doesn't come without downsides.

 

[ellisson]

Nikon manual focus SLRs like the FM, FE, and FA series cameras use a rubber eyepiece, although it's missing on many cameras on the used market. The replacement is available new for about $27 and won't scratch your glasses when right up against the viewfinder. The entire field of view is visible with a 28mm lens and wider lenses.
If you still have problems with critical focus, stop down a bit, especially useful with 28mm and wider lenses.

 

[Spavinaw]

Somewhere I have a Canon SLR finder attachment that minifies the view but I think it gave more eye relief. Emphasis on the word "think". I can't find it yet, but I'll keep looking. Maybe someone else knows about this.