Smallest LTM camera with 35mm finder?

[02Pilot]

Don't think it's been mentioned yet, but while the L1 does have a 35mm finder, it's tiny. Really tiny. If one is considering something that large, a slightly larger Canon P is a better choice (unless you need glasses), with a huge 1:1 35mm finder.

 

[newst]

Don't think it's been mentioned yet, but while the L1 does have a 35mm finder, it's tiny. Really tiny. If one is considering something that large, a slightly larger Canon P is a better choice (unless you need glasses), with a huge 1:1 35mm finder.

I will agree that the L1 finder isn't as large as some other cameras. It hasn't been a problem for me, as using the magnified RF view for focusing then the 35mm view for composing is easy. Very similar to using the magnified rangefinder to focus a Barnack then switching to the viewfinder for composition.

 

[Dralowid]

I know it is not a rangefinder and I know it is 28 instead of 35mm but the Ricoh GR1 was one of my favourite cameras of all time. It is tiny!

 

[dexdog]

I will agree that the L1 finder isn't as large as some other cameras. It hasn't been a problem for me, as using the magnified RF view for focusing then the 35mm view for composing is easy. Very similar to using the magnified rangefinder to focus a Barnack then switching to the viewfinder for composition.

I endorse the above, this is how I have always used my rangefinder Canons. The L1 is my favorite Canon RF, so I am biased. It is a close race between the L1 and Canon P, with edge to the L1 in my opinion.

 

[mothertrucker]

Don't think it's been mentioned yet, but while the L1 does have a 35mm finder, it's tiny. Really tiny. If one is considering something that large, a slightly larger Canon P is a better choice (unless you need glasses), with a huge 1:1 35mm finder.

I did consider the P, but, I do wear glasses. So, that option was kind of dead for me. I am good with a small finder. Thanks to recommendations on the head bartender's site about the gold tone rangefinder patch on the L1, I found a good one which is still easy to focus. I understand some of the Ps have a faded rangefinder patch and I didn't want to take a chance on that either.

 

[jsrockit]

The Canon L1 looks like a fun camera... I've used the P, but never considered an L1.

 

[mothertrucker]

Looking at 2 out of 3 criteria, the obvious one is an Olympus XA which is a range-finder with a 35mm viewfinder as it is fitted with a F Zuiko f/2.8 lens.

And it is the smallest film rangefinder I know...

Regards, David

Ah if I were sensible I would just pull that one out, I do have one in a drawer. It comes out once in a while.

 

[Darinwc]

The leica iiig finder almost covers 35mm, if you look outside the framelines.

 

[David Hughes]

Ah if I were sensible I would just pull that one out, I do have one in a drawer. It comes out once in a while.

Years ago I wondered how the F/2.8 35mm Summaron compared to the Zuiko in the XA with the same f/2.8 and 35mm spec.

So I used the last two films from a pack, one in each and took the two cameras (M2 and XA) around duplicating the photos and using the XA's exposure reading. Printed etc at the same time and lab. and in 5" x 7½" I couldn't see a difference.

The acid test might have been at 8" x 12" and larger but I think most people would be happy with the smaller prints.

I think I've made the point before - several times - that at 4" x 6" most lenses are "excellent" and I wonder why people worry so much about them.

This also applies to 18 mp digitals on 1½mp monitors. Quality is only noticed/relevant at the larger extremes.


Regards, David