Leica LTM Vidom finder

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
lxmike

lxmike

M2 fan.
Local time
9:15 AM
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Messages
4,137
toying to get a Leitz Vidom finder, as l have leitz 3.5 and 5cm lenses, what are poeples feelings, how good as finders are they:)
 
lxmike said:
many thanks l really do fancy getting the 3.5cm finder but they are so expensive:D
Click to expand...

The FSU 3.5 cm finder is not very expensive, plus there are a whole slew of very good 1950s Japanese 35mm finders, from Canon to Tanack that sell for much less than any Leitz product.

The 50mm finder is another story, not much choice here, The Leitz SBOOI is very nice but not cheap and neither is the newish Voigtlander offering and the Canon 50mm finder is not common or generally cheap to buy.
 
The VIDOM finder is not all that practical to use. The distance to the subject must be set. The image is reversed left-to-right. To take a portrait oriented shot, you must turn a knob, then turn it the other way to go back to landscape. A black mask surrounds the picture area so that you only see a very small area for 135mm, and nothing outside the frame for any focal length. And finally, I have not proved it to myself yet, but I don't believe the framing is that accurate. I have used one a few times for casual walk-about picture taking, and it is one of my least liked pieces of camera equipment - all work, no fun.
 
Last edited:
xayraa33 said:
The FSU 3.5 cm finder is not very expensive, plus there are a whole slew of very good 1950s Japanese 35mm finders, from Canon to Tanack that sell for much less than any Leitz product.

The 50mm finder is another story, not much choice here, The Leitz SBOOI is very nice but not cheap and neither is the newish Voigtlander offering and the Canon 50mm finder is not common or generally cheap to buy.
Click to expand...

really do need to get a SBOOI but they are sooo expensive, better start saving now:D
 
sreed2006 said:
The VIDOM finder is not all that practical to use. The distance to the subject must be set. The image is reversed left-to-right. To take a portrait oriented shot, you must turn a knob, then turn it the other way to go back to landscape. A black mask surrounds the picture area so that you only see a very small area for 135mm, and nothing outside the frame for any focal length. And finally, I have not proved it to myself yet, but I don't believe the framing is that accurate. I have used one a few times for casual walk-about picture taking, and it is one of my least liked pieces of camera equipment - all work, no fun.
Click to expand...


thanks you have confirmed my fears that l need to spend a few more pennies on a 50mm and 35 finder instead of yhe VIDOM:eek:
 
The 35mm Voigtlander finder is very good. I got a metal one last year off e bay for $100 and I think it was worth it. I use it with my IIIc and Nikkor 35mm f2.5 and it still fits in my pocket. If I had to go with just one camera and lens that could do it. Joe
 
You can buy an Imarect (VIOOOH) for about $60. It's the improved version of the Vidom, unreversed. I was a bit wary, but bought one and I really like it. There are no bright lines, but the field of view is sharply bordered and accurate. The downside is that the 35mm frame has seriously rounded corners, but otherwise it's great. It's a lot smaller than the Russian finder, and has a much better quality image.

Try to not buy one that's fogged, but they can be cleaned if needed.

What sold me on the Imarect was discovering that James Ravelious (http://www.beaford-arts.org.uk/archive/) used one on his M3 because he felt it gave him a better feeling for the final printed image, and I think it does. (Ravelious has become one of my favorite photogs, and you can see all 7000 or so of his images by reloading the page above and paging through the pix--eventually they all show up).
 
The VIDOM does take some getting used to with the reversed image, but I like it a little better than my VIOOH. But that's because the image through the VIOOH is a little more dim in my sample.
 
Hi,

There's rather a wide choice from the 30's onwards.

I've most of them in the collection and prefer the KMZ universal* one to all the others but I wear glasses and that's a problem with the 30's and 40's Leitz ones. I checked them all this morning just to be certain. The original one is a display only item in my view.

EDITED: There's also the ROSOL sports finder by Leitz but it's a little fragile and too large, imo. It covers only 50, 85, 90 and 135mm lenses. There's also the RASAL from the 30's that covers 35, 50 and 90mm and with an extra optional frame (RAMET) adds 105 and 135mm. You can tell the earlier ones as they are not marked in mm but in cm; ie 3,5cm not 35mm. A bit clumsy in use and easily damaged, in my experience.

Lastly, there's the cheap and cheerful Helios Japanese made finder for 35, 85 and 135mm. It's OK but becomes a bit vague at times as the light falling on it varies. And you can baffle yourself by putting it on the round way round and lose a shot...

I don't worry too much about the frame-lines being accurate, we lose a lot of the picture when printing, unless we do 4" x 6" prints; mainly because the aspect ratio isn't right for 3:2 with most printer papers. Although you can get nearly 8" x 12" from A4 paper.

Lastly, all these vf's are weird/unusual looking things. Hang around looking in street markets and you might just pick one up for pennies as I once did...

Regards, David

*Another point in its favour is that the KMZ vf covers 28mm and the older ones don't.
 
Last edited:
The VIDOM finder is sort of counter intuitive, VIOOH tends to get dimmer with age because the cement holding the little prisms together degrades.

I'd bite the bullet and go for the individual finders, either Leitz or V/C. If you are sticking with 35 and 50 you only need one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom