dazedgonebye
Veteran
Can anyone help me with the differences between these two finders?
http://tinyurl.com/wbfx6
http://tinyurl.com/y99nd9
Is one prefered above the other?
http://tinyurl.com/wbfx6
http://tinyurl.com/y99nd9
Is one prefered above the other?
markinlondon
Elmar user
One shows the image the wrong way up, but I can never remember which is which.
Mark Wood
Well-known
VIOOH gives the right way around image. When cleaned up, they're very bright and clear and very accurate in terms of parallax correction (if you don't mind the frames getting smaller as focal length increases).
dazedgonebye
Veteran
markinlondon said:
Well, that's sort of ironic...
dazedgonebye
Veteran
Mark Wood said:
Besides being reversed...how does the other one perform?
Mark Wood
Well-known
I've only ever used VIOOH so unfortunately I'm not much help on VIDOM. It is a significantly older model though.
dazedgonebye
Veteran
I just read a bit on these from photoethnography.com...neither sounds like a picnic to use.
I think I'll look for a zoom finder.
I think I'll look for a zoom finder.
physiognomy
Confirmed RF addict...
There was a zoom finder for sale in the classifieds a couple of weeks back... check to see if it was snatched up... The TEWE & Nikon copies are pretty reasonably priced & show up on ebay from time to time... I picked up mine for under $50.
Peter
Peter
clintock
Galleryless Gearhead
The VIOOH is the right way round one, the Vidom I don't have, I think it's got left to right reversed, and you have to spin over or something with the eyepiece when shooting portrait, so things are not upside down. I assume the VIDOM must be a little brighter since it does not have the three or however many prisims in it that the VIOOH does.
The VIOOH, also called Imarect, is fine on a bessa t for example, it does not portude aft of the shoe like the contax and contax copy russian turrets do.
Both of the Imarect I have were haze city when I got them, and taking the back off using the little screws is only step one in the cleaning battle, it takes a lens spanner to get the elements out, but once cleaned it's a good little thing.
Using the 135 setting is like looking through a straw, but the 35 and 50 are just fine.
The VIOOH, also called Imarect, is fine on a bessa t for example, it does not portude aft of the shoe like the contax and contax copy russian turrets do.
Both of the Imarect I have were haze city when I got them, and taking the back off using the little screws is only step one in the cleaning battle, it takes a lens spanner to get the elements out, but once cleaned it's a good little thing.
Using the 135 setting is like looking through a straw, but the 35 and 50 are just fine.
Last edited:
dazedgonebye
Veteran
physiognomy said:
I'm kicking myself for missing that finder in the classifieds. It went fast.
I'm tracking a couple of things on ebay.
akptc
Shoot first, think later
I've tried several zoom finders and so far TEWE zoom finders seem to be the most practical. I am now using a 35-200mm TEWE and could not be happier (well, I could - if the TEWE was built into my RF body )
)
dazedgonebye
Veteran
There are a couple of Tewe finders on the bay right now. We'll see what they go for.
BillBingham2
Registered User
Make sure you ask if you go to bid if the view is clear and in focus. I got what looked like a great one (not a Tewe or Nikon) that is out of focus (I forgot to ask). Was sold as-is, UGH.
Keep your eyes open for a RASAL (leica code name) on evilBay. I have two and love them. They are 35-135 (with LOTS in between) sport or wire finders which pack down to almost nothing. When shoting fast moving subjects, it's really handy to see what's else is out there.
B2 (;->
Keep your eyes open for a RASAL (leica code name) on evilBay. I have two and love them. They are 35-135 (with LOTS in between) sport or wire finders which pack down to almost nothing. When shoting fast moving subjects, it's really handy to see what's else is out there.
B2 (;->
John Shriver
Well-known
The VIOOH (Imarect) is fun. The image does get rather small at 90mm, and ridiculously small at 135mm. It has very accurate framing, due to the complicated design that puts both the viewed image and the frame in sharp focus.
The VIDOM does the same thing, but with a less sophisticated prism design that leaves the image swapped side to side.
Both are the type of telescope that leaves the image completely flipped (just like a lens on a camera), so the prism systems correct for that. They also make the optical path physically longer, otherwise they would need to be very long indeed.
Note that the VIDOM is longer, since the roof prism it uses doesn't fold the optical path as much.
A nice thing about the VIOOH is that the reflecting surfaces of the prisms aren't slivered, they're just flat glass. The non-reflecting surfaces are painted black. Thus, you don't need to worry about failed silvering, you just clean all the exposed glass surfaces. Of course, if the prisms have come unglued, it's "game over" time.
Both of these finders make the image more like a "picture" in a black mat, they can help you think about composition. (This is why HCB liked the VIDOM.) But, they leave you with no peripheral vision, not good for action like a bright-line finder.
All the zoom finders seem to be of the same basic design. I have the Walz one, maybe they copied the German Tewe one? They have the advantage that the magnification goes up as you zoom towards telephoto, so the image is only a little smaller at 135mm. But they have disadvantages. The frame mask is not in focus, so you have a soft edge like any Galilean finder. There's barrel distortion at 35mm. Finally, the diopter gets rather strong at 135mm, maybe +1, and I just can't focus my eye enough past infinity to use it out there. (Maybe I could have when I was 20, but not at 48.) I don't know if all the zoom finders share this last trait, but know they share the others.
The VIDOM does the same thing, but with a less sophisticated prism design that leaves the image swapped side to side.
Both are the type of telescope that leaves the image completely flipped (just like a lens on a camera), so the prism systems correct for that. They also make the optical path physically longer, otherwise they would need to be very long indeed.
Note that the VIDOM is longer, since the roof prism it uses doesn't fold the optical path as much.
A nice thing about the VIOOH is that the reflecting surfaces of the prisms aren't slivered, they're just flat glass. The non-reflecting surfaces are painted black. Thus, you don't need to worry about failed silvering, you just clean all the exposed glass surfaces. Of course, if the prisms have come unglued, it's "game over" time.
Both of these finders make the image more like a "picture" in a black mat, they can help you think about composition. (This is why HCB liked the VIDOM.) But, they leave you with no peripheral vision, not good for action like a bright-line finder.
All the zoom finders seem to be of the same basic design. I have the Walz one, maybe they copied the German Tewe one? They have the advantage that the magnification goes up as you zoom towards telephoto, so the image is only a little smaller at 135mm. But they have disadvantages. The frame mask is not in focus, so you have a soft edge like any Galilean finder. There's barrel distortion at 35mm. Finally, the diopter gets rather strong at 135mm, maybe +1, and I just can't focus my eye enough past infinity to use it out there. (Maybe I could have when I was 20, but not at 48.) I don't know if all the zoom finders share this last trait, but know they share the others.