wildmuskellunge
Member
Are there cameras other than the Yashica's that feature the super scope on top of the camera?
The other day, I was wondering why there were no cameras with this feature, which seems like it would be easy enough to implement and would guarantee better-framed photos. I always worry about cropping heads with viewfinder cameras.
But what I was actually dreaming of was a little more involved, with a periscope in front of the lens that would swing of the way automatically when the shutter button is pressed, or a hot shoe attachment that did the same.
The other day, I was wondering why there were no cameras with this feature, which seems like it would be easy enough to implement and would guarantee better-framed photos. I always worry about cropping heads with viewfinder cameras.
But what I was actually dreaming of was a little more involved, with a periscope in front of the lens that would swing of the way automatically when the shutter button is pressed, or a hot shoe attachment that did the same.
Hi,
There are a lot of cameras with this feature, box cameras, folding cameras and - for example - Leicas with the AUFSU gizmo fitted. I call them waist level view finders, btw. And I have a very low opinion of them and as for the Periflex...
Anyway, what's wrong with just buying (say) any old SLR, with or without the WLVF, which will do the job far better?
Regards, David
Sure, I was aware of the Periflex. I keep looking for one to buy, but they cost a bit more than I can do.
Me too, actually. Mostly because I think those early ideas are interesting. I don't think especially practical but it would be fun!
For those of us who are left eyed shooters, there are not very many cameras that we can use with both eyes in the RF or scale focus cameras. Although, I usually turn the camera down when shooting vertical (on 35mm) so that I can use both eyes in that situation.
There were some slr cameras that did not have the vf centered, most recently, I think, was the Minolta Vectis APS camera which had the vf in the left corner.
Rob
There's nothing wrong with an SLR, and the existence of SLRs explains why such contraptions don't exist. But I like to tinker. The defining characteristic of the feature being discussed is the periscope. It could easily be used with an eye-level finder instead. The waist-level finders you've used examples are all of a different type, with a mirror reflecting directly on a screen without a second mirror or prism to relay the image like in a periscope.
I guess my thoughts boil down to a question about the history of photography. There was an era where some large portion of photographers used the viewfinder/rangefinder system rather than directly viewing the image on a ground glass and through the lens viewing hadn't been miniaturized yet to create the SLR (or they just continued using rangefinder cameras). Maybe it doesn't matter in the scheme of things, but it has always seemed odd to me that the finder windows on many cameras is located to the side and above the taking lens which makes the kind of tight composition available with ground glass or SLRs difficult or impossible with a viewfinder. I know this is partially an ergonomic issue making it easier to hold the camera on side of the face, instead of across the bridge of the nose. But again, a periscope could have made it possible to shift the image to the side of the camera, but left the viewing lens in the middle, and at least correct one dimension of parallax.