Which M has the best VF?

Which M has the best VF?

  • M3 VF 0.91

    Votes: 88 33.2%

  • 0.58

    Votes: 16 6.0%

  • 0.72

    Votes: 43 16.2%

  • 0.85

    Votes: 7 2.6%

  • New MP/M7 0.58

    Votes: 10 3.8%

  • New MP/M7 0.72

    Votes: 45 17.0%

  • New MP/M7 0.85

    Votes: 15 5.7%

  • M8/M9 VF 0.62

    Votes: 4 1.5%

  • Do not like the Leica M VF. Like the Zeiss VF

    Votes: 29 10.9%

  • Do not like the Leica M VF. Like the Bessa R3 VF

    Votes: 3 1.1%

  • Do not like the Leica M VF. Like the Bessa R4 VF

    Votes: 4 1.5%

  • Do not like the Leica M VF. Like the Bessa R2 VF

    Votes: 1 0.4%
  • Total voters
    265
thomasw_ said:
oldoc is swinging with the sweet tunes; the MP 0,85x VF is the best all-round VF for 35-50-75-90 RF shooters with the perfect balance of accuracy and frameline spacing and lack of distracting flare. For pure 50 or 90 shooting, hard to beat the M3; but it is lame for any 35 shooting.
Click to expand...

Thomas, your words are sweet tunes to my years! I'm waiting for my new a la cart MP with 0,85 VF. Just hope I've made the right decision.. :confused:
 
This poll was incomplete: the iiif wasnt listed as an option (?!?!). From what I understand, modifications are availabe for M series VFs at Sherry Ks and DAG for aboot $225 bucks. The modifications includes the MP VF patch for no flare, increased contrast, and maybe MP brightlines too.
I've heard all the great things about the M3, but it does not have 35mm lines. Perhaps they could be added? but you may have to decrease magnification? and that may be the deal breaker?
 
DNG said:
I am looking at getting a 28/2 and 50/1.5 for a ZI or M6ttl.... But If I decide on the M6ttl, I may want a .58 VF...But I cant find any info on what frames are in the .58 VF... I'm guessing 25/28/35/50?
Or something with a wider than 28mm.
Can someone list the frames in a .58 vf please.
Thanks.

Edit...
Found it.... 28/35/50/90
But, how about with f/1.5 lens... is this not a Wide enough base line?
Click to expand...

Hi DNG,

for what it's worth I always feel underwhelmed when I try Leicas. Maybe too much expectation. I was tempted by a M5 recently and checked one out yesterday.
The viewfinder is dim, the frames are dim, and the information at the bottom of the frame is not very visible. Nice uncluttered framelines though.
I had the same impression when deciding between M6 & ZI. Too cluttered, too dim, too tight: not impressed by the M6 either.
 
Martin- You must have had a dud M5 because the viewfinder is really quite good. The only time the meter is tough to read is in true pitch black conditions.

Next to the M3 the M5 has my fav 50mm view, combined with a terrific meter.

Kent

PS- the beauty in all these responses is that everyone has their own style and preferences, there's no "right answer" :)

morback said:
Hi DNG,

for what it's worth I always feel underwhelmed when I try Leicas. Maybe too much expectation. I was tempted by a M5 recently and checked one out yesterday.
The viewfinder is dim, the frames are dim, and the information at the bottom of the frame is not very visible. Nice uncluttered framelines though.
I had the same impression when deciding between M6 & ZI. Too cluttered, too dim, too tight: not impressed by the M6 either.
Click to expand...
 
I think the answers to this poll are confused. On the basis of A) brightness and B) RELATIVE magnification, Zeiss Ikon is two steps ahead of anything else. What it means, is that the 0.74x ZI viewfinder will let you comfortably use 28,35,50 and 85mm frames (the 28mm gets a bit tight if you wear glasses). What's more, the relative SIZE of each frame will be bigger than the same frame in a 0.72x Leica, AND the image will be at least a stop brighter (and there is no flare). It also has single 35mm and 50mm frames, plus the RF accuracy is only second to M3. In practice, it has a Leica 0.58x and 0.72x viewfinders covered in one. Frankly, there is nothing better than this around for general shooting. I wear glasses, so for me the M3 was hardly usable, and for a dedicated 50mm body I use an 0.85x M7. For wider lenses, obviously the Bessa R4 wins hands down. If Zeiss made different magnifications bodies, they would make Leicas and Bessas redundant.
 
mfogiel said:
I wear glasses, so for me the M3 was hardly usable...
Click to expand...

I think this highlights the immense variations in eyeglasses. I wear glasses -- a strong prescription with compressed polycarbonate progressive lenses -- and had no difficulties using an M3's viewfinder. Yes, I had to be careful about positioning my eye to see the 50mm framelines sharply. I have never used a camera that didn't require careful eye placement. I attribute that to the progressive lenses, because sharpness of vision varies from one location on the lens to the next.

Others with different prescriptions, different lenses and different frames will have different experiences. I spoke with my ophthalmologist about this. Things that make a big difference include the distance the eyeglass lenses sit from the eyes, the distance the camera's finder glass is from the eyeglass lense, the path(s) of light through the finder, light reflected back from the photographer's face, and, of course, the actual problems the eyeglasses are intended to correct. It's down to try it and see.
 
What about my Rollei 35RF? It's based on the CV Bessa R2 and it really is great for glasses wearers. I'm not upset that it's not on the poll, but wanted to say that anyone who wears glasses and is considering a CV Bessa should check it out. It has an odd 40, 50, 80 frameline combo but that may be useful to some, so far I only use it for the 50.
 
Looking through an M3 VF makes subjects virtually the same size as they are without the VF. Makes it easy to frame and shoot.

M2 has cleanest frame lines.

--Gib
 
Erik van Straten said:
Leica M3, Elmar-M 50mm f/2.8, Tmax400 printed on Ilford MGIV fb.
Click to expand...
Personally, I often go "Leica M3, Elmar-M 50mm f2.8, Tri-X, scan on Nikon 5000ES and print on Hahnemuhle Photo Rag".

I do like my M3 finder - but I also like the finder of the Hexar RF. Which is more versatile. I suspect I'd like a Leica 0.58 finder and a ZI finder, though I've never looked. If I shot more wide stuff I'd probably want a Bessa R4. But I'm happy enough for now with my M3 and Hexar RFs.

There's nowhere I can vote for that, though.

...Mike
 
I only own an M2 and a Zeiss, but have also eyeballed a few others. The Zeiss blows them all away, with my M2 being second and M3's a close third.
 
Since I wear eyeglasses, i voted for the 0.58 finder--but with reservations. My reservation is that I wish they had not downsized the framelines to make them agree with the closest focus distance. The ideal thing would be to have the .58 MP framelines--28/35/50/75/90--sized for a medium distance, rather than favoring a distance of 0.7M. So if I didn't need a .58 finder, I would vote for the M4P, the early one with full sized framelines.
 
leica vf weakness

leica vf weakness

Because of conservative design philosophies, Leica never really mastered the eye relief problem. For eyeglass wearers, they still have to squint to see the whole picture. Also their diopter correction lenses are woefully indadequate covering only a small spectrum. Zeiss on the other hand has been able to break thru with not only bright VF's but covering a wider angle of view. So, viewfinders were not and are not Leica's forte.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom