Mackinaw
Think Different
I have an old Nikon M rangefinder that I use on occasion. Last year, I picked up from a guy on RFF a somewhat rare, Canon 28/3.5 lens in Contax/Nikon mount. Great lens that I’d like to use more. I’d like to buy a 28mm viewfinder for the “hot” shoe to help with composition, but just realized that the M uses a 24mm X 34mm format. Basically, it’s a smaller sensor size compared to the regular “full-frame” 24X36 format. Would it make more sense to buy a 35mm viewfinder to compensate for the smaller format size? Or is the difference so small, I shouldn’t worry about it?
Jim B.
Jim B.
B-9
Devin Bro
Jim, the difference is so small I wouldn't put much more thought into it and grab a 28 VF.
richardHaw
junk scavenger
not a pro with RF cameras but framing with an RF isn't really so like what was mentioned, the difference doesn't even count.
enasniearth
Well-known
finder
finder
the 28 finder would be a better choice , many optical finders show an area smaller than what is actually on the film .
2mm narrower is not much , I shot a lot with a Nikon s and s2 in the 1970's you could definitely spot the s negatives , but you get used to the format after you shoot some with the finder and body combo .
the 28 finder will be more accurate
finder
the 28 finder would be a better choice , many optical finders show an area smaller than what is actually on the film .
2mm narrower is not much , I shot a lot with a Nikon s and s2 in the 1970's you could definitely spot the s negatives , but you get used to the format after you shoot some with the finder and body combo .
the 28 finder will be more accurate