Viewfinder

Bill Pierce

Well-known
Local time
10:03 PM
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
1,407
This being the Rangefinder Forum, I suspect many of us are bright-line finder addicts. I’m truly a bright-iine finder addict. I like to know what’s just outside my frame line and about to enter it, especially if whatever it is will improve my picture, ruin my picture or possibly do physical harm to me. I like the brightness. I like seeing the full range of shadow and highlight detail even in dim light. (And even in brightly lit landscapes because my TTL finders can sometimes be a little difficult to use in very bright, harsh sunlight. That’s right, I have actually put bright line finders in the accessory shoes of TTL cameras.)

What isn’t nice is the cost of many a bright-line finder. If you want it built into your camera, a Leica M10 will cost you $6895. If you are shooting outside of the range of frame lines built into the camera, say with a 21mm lens, an auxilliary Leitz 21mm finder will cost you approximately $900, a used finder a few $100’s less if you can pry it from the display cabinet of a collector who never uses it.

With auxiliary finders, you can save money with Voigtlander finders. Some are plastic; some, metal. If they are available in metal, I go with that. But all the finders are more than adequate. Frankly, if you are going for a new finder, this is where I would go. (Even cheaper are Russian made finders which are difficult to find even on Ebay - but they are not a great loss.)

When it comes to camera bodies, the film folks have an affordable path, used rangefinders, with the suggestion that they check the focusing accuracy of the rangefinder and have it adjusted if necessary. Us digital folks (Yes, I still have Leica film bodies, but to say they get little use is an understatement.), we have Fuji, the folks who gave us medium format film rangefinders, to thank for smaller, APS-c digital cameras with built in bright-line finders at a somewhat reasonable price.

Early in the game I got an X100, their small camera with both bright-line, optical finder and electronic finder and a fixed 35mm equivalent lens. The current generation of the series, the X100 F, is probably my most used camera (although my wife would prefer I did her portraits with a longer focal length lens). And the XPro 2, their bright-line/electronic finder camera with interchangeable lenses is probably my second most used camera and most used money earner.

Photography is about looking at things through a camera. It can be the upside down view of a large format ground glass, the wire frame of an old press camera, the optical finder, the electronic viewfinder, the LCD, the bright-line finder, the computer screen in a studio set up and, I’m sure, some I haven’t thought of. And, it’s through those finders that we make/create our pictures. It’s a big part of the picture making process, and it’s amazing how often many people purchase a camera without ever thinking about the viewfinder - which, of course, brings us to WHAT DO YOU THINK?
 
I have found that I compose better and am more comfortable using the LCD on my Fujis. In the viewfinder is too cramped for my vision or something like that. I miss things, strange things appear in the frame on the computer that weren't in the viewfinder when I took the shot (that's my story and I'm sticking to it). This is of course void when it's high, bright sunlight out.
 
My first digital camera was the very capable Canon G3. However, I quickly discovered that I felt uncomfortably disconnected with the camera using the LCD screen. While the camera came with a small optical viewfinder, I tried using the LCD as much as possible, since i reckoned that was simply the next direction of photography.

So it was not so much quality but a desire for a proper viewfinder as well as quicker shutter response that I picked up an DSLR.

Anyway, these days, I use a Leica M2, and I still use the 50mm accessory finder that I originally purchased while using a iiif. For static shots, I’ll sometimes use the camera’s built-in finder, but for quick candid shots, I find the accessory viewfinder less obstructed, or at least quicker to access. Plus, at 1X magnification, it is exceptionally clear and can be used with both eyes opened without distortion.
 
I've found myself accumulating an alarmingly large collection of viewfinders, but doing so has at least given me to the chance to compare and decide what's really important.

For street photography, my number one priority is having a 1:1 view through the finder in order to keep both eyes open. There are thankfully several options for doing this, at least with the 50mm focal length: the Leitz SBOOI, the modern Voigtländer equivalent, and the earlier Voigtländer Kontur all do the job, though I prefer the former simply because it's the most compact.

I've also found the auto-adjusting parallax of the Canon V/VI series bodies paired with the appropriate finders to be very useful. I have a couple of the bodies and most of the viewfinders at this point. While I'd rather use smaller Barnack bodies most of the time, the Canons come out when framing is more critical, especially with focal lengths longer than 50mm.
 
Back when I was using film Leicas, I had a Voigtlander 21mm lens and finder--even had the little case that held the lens and finder in separate compartments. When I bought a Fujinon 14mm (21mm equiv.) for my X-Pro1, I also bought a used Voigtlander 21mm finder for use on the XP1. (The XP1's EVF is unusable for me due to my vision--I need reading glasses to focus on the image in the EVF but then I can't see squat elsewhere. I've never had this problem with my X100S, only the X-Pro1.) Unfortunately, the finder fit too far forward on the Fuji for me to use well. My solution was to buy a used Fuji X-E2 for the 14mm lens. While it was an expensive solution, I came to appreciate the utility of EVFs, especially when I can see through the damn things. Since then, I've been using the X-T1 a lot and its EVF is truly outstanding.

I still prefer an OVF with bright lines like that in the X100 and XP series Fujis but they work best for me with lenses between 28 and 50mm (equiv.) Longer or shorter, I use one of the EVF model Fujis.
 
I have found that I compose better and am more comfortable using the LCD on my Fujis. In the viewfinder is too cramped for my vision or something like that. I miss things, strange things appear in the frame on the computer that weren't in the viewfinder when I took the shot (that's my story and I'm sticking to it). This is of course void when it's high, bright sunlight out.


I can't really use LCD without taking my glasses off (and if i take off, I only see what's close to me), so in my situation viewfinder is the only comfortable way (and please do not suggest bifocals 🙂).

I guess holding camera far away from you (looking at LCD) also reduces stability (somewhat).
 
"Yes, I still have Leica film bodies, but to say they get little use is an understatement"... Well, this corner is due to "Fuji X photog" facade upgrade.

With loosing of honorable Tom we need new mentor who is still with rangefinders. My vote is for Allen Bourgeois. He is Leica photog, the real one.
 
....And, it’s through those finders that we make/create our pictures. It’s a big part of the picture making process, and it’s amazing how often many people purchase a camera without ever thinking about the viewfinder - which, of course, brings us to WHAT DO YOU THINK?

Few things are more satisfying than quickly raising a pre-focused rangefinder to your right eye and instantly taking everything in through that clear optical window and those wonderful framelines.

I can live with or without coincident focusing, but framelines and the right-eyed window view, whether on analogue or digital bodies, is at the heart of the RF experience for me. Nothing else quite like it.

I try external finders sometimes, but always feel left eye viewing is necessary, and I miss my familiar view.

John
 
Since getting back into using rangefinder cameras, I started out with using variable finders, as sometimes I could find one at a great price (like when it was included in a box lot), but have come to the conclusion that a bright-line finder is more conducive to better viewing.

Plus, there is less bulk on top of the camera with a single focal length finder. Sure, you have to carry extra pieces of gear, but usually when I mount a particular lens on the camera, it stays there for most of the roll, if not all of it. I also have less of a chance of having the wrong frame selected if using a single FL finder.

But the cameras I like the best have built-in frames, which quickens the operation.

PF
 
I'm with A.S. I like using the IIIf with Elmar 50/3.5 that I inherited from my father. It came with a 50mm finder he picked up in Holland long ago. The finder is a genuine Albada, marked as such. Great for two-eyed shooting!
 
Good topic here. My story is not about accessory finders, but I'm definitely a brightline finder addict.

When I first got serious about rangefinders I got an M3 and a 35mm f2.8 Summaron with goggles. I was over the moon with my new camera setup, and although I had used an Oly XA previously, it was my first good rangefinder. The finder was great. Big, easy to see focus patch and the lovely, thick rounded corner framelines. As I used my rangefinder I liked it more and more, and as most camera nuts do, read peoples perspectives on shooting with a rangefinder. Explanations like: a plain window to view the world through with none of the DOF effects an SLR gives you; projected framelines in that view of the world indicating the little rectangle we captured when we pushed the shutter button; also, and this is a big one: a bit of a view outside the frame we will capture that we can use to help evaluate the scene and aim those framelines at just the right spot at just the right time. This point especially was one of the unique features of using a projected frameline viewfinder, and one of the joys of using a rangefinder. So people said...
However, my M3-Summaron didn't really allow me to take advantage of this feature. If I crammed the camera against my face with my right eye all the way up to the finder's rear window, I could kinda see beyond the edges of that thick bright frameline in my M3, but that is just not how I was shooting it, and not how I wanted to shoot it. I am a lefty, and I also appreciate viewing comfort; i didn't want to have to squish the camera against my nose to get a good view through the finder.
It didn't take me long to learn about better options for me. Leica's 0.58 magnification finder cameras, a goggled 35mm like my Summaron on a 0.72 magnification finder camera, a CV Bessa R4. As we all know there is always something better just over the horizon in camera land, but I still loved my M3-Summaron setup, and cherished it and shot it regularly.
One day I was at Map Camera in Tokyo where they happend to have a 0.58 mag M6 on the shelf. I chatted with the sales guy about the value of my M3-Summaron, and asked to handle the M6. I wasn't serious about trading in my precious camera, but I wanted to look through the wide angle finder on that M6 and see what all the hype was a bout. I lifted the camera to my face the way I had been doing with my M3 for the past year comfortably peeping through the finder with my left eye and it was all there: big clear focus patch, clear projected framelines, and a view beyond the framelines where I could see the world around me as I framed. That was it, the unique feature of the rangefinder to let its user see the world. I told the sales man I would have to think about the trade-in and he put the camera away.

It would be two more years before I could finally get a 0.58 M6 for myself, as well as a goggle-free 35mm lens. But I was able to keep my M3 which I am happily using to shoot my 90mm and occasionally 50mm.

So I really appreciate these comments about being crazy about viewfinders. I have another story about finding the right 21mm finder, but its time to go to work!
 
This being the Rangefinder Forum, I suspect many of us are bright-line finder addicts....
....and it’s amazing how often many people purchase a camera without ever thinking about the viewfinder - which, of course, brings us to WHAT DO YOU THINK?

The viewfinder is my first consideration. That is because I prefer SLR viewing and manual focusing, so, if you cannot see clearly and focus accurately, whats the use. Might explain why I like my OM-1 and it's big bright finder with interchangeable screen (the 1-10 matte with grid is installed in all my OM bodies).

This is also why I haven't seen a mirrorless that meets my needs. When they look exactly like a OM-1 with matte screen (and that will never happen) then I'll go digital.
 
Struggling with the finder situation currently. Had a beautiful Leica iiif, but always hated the separate focus, separate viewfinder, so I sold it and got an M3, which I loved. But then I started shooting more 35mm instead of 50mm, and the M3, without goggles, just can't do that. I also fell in love with a Nikkor 3.5cm f1.8 rangefinder lens, that I use on my Nikon S2. Love the S2 finder, but again, no accommodation for 35mm. So now I'm stuck, love the image quality from the S2/3.5cm, but struggle with framing. Have looked at 35mm external finders, but as you said Bill, they're REALLY expensive, and then I get back to the "focus through one finder, frame through the other" and I don't like working that way.

So for now, I use the 3.5cm on the S2 and try to guesstimate the framing. Not ideal, and sometimes I'm surprised by everything that was caught on the film, but it's the best I can come up with for now.

Best,
-Tim
 
I can live with rangefinders as long as I don't need to use an extra auxilary viewfinder. And as I really like 35mm and wider this makes rf a pain.
 
An external finder saved my little Fujifilm X10. These had a zoom-with-the-lens optical finder in-body that commonly broke the linkage, rendering the optical finder permanently out of focus.

But then I remembered that the camera's native aspect ratio is 4:3, and that Olympus makes an external finder in 4:3 with a 28mm equivalent angle of view, and an internal frameline for 35. And it was about $50us IIR. Viola! That's how I still use the camera. The hotshoe is aligned over the lens so parallax adjustment is merely vertical. And the lens has markings for the 28 and 35mm equivalent angles of view.
 
X100F / X-Pro2 user... but admit to using the EVF mostly. However, when the EVF isn't allowing me to see properly, it sure is nice to have the OVF. Prior to Fuji's, I used Leica.
 
Back
Top Bottom