marek_
Established
Hi,
I'm thinking of getting a finder to go with a 21mm lens. My question is, has anyone had any experience with both the Zeiss 21mm external finder and the viewfinder in the Voigtlander Bessa R4 cameras. I know one is a full camera and the other's just a viewfinder, but which finder do you find nicer, more pleasant, easier too look through. Has one go more distortion, is one clearer, how do the frame lines compare?
I generally prefer not to use an external finder but the weight/bulk issue of carrying another camera is something to think about? But not having to change lenses would be nice too. I'd appreciate you thoughts.
Thanks,
Mark
I'm thinking of getting a finder to go with a 21mm lens. My question is, has anyone had any experience with both the Zeiss 21mm external finder and the viewfinder in the Voigtlander Bessa R4 cameras. I know one is a full camera and the other's just a viewfinder, but which finder do you find nicer, more pleasant, easier too look through. Has one go more distortion, is one clearer, how do the frame lines compare?
I generally prefer not to use an external finder but the weight/bulk issue of carrying another camera is something to think about? But not having to change lenses would be nice too. I'd appreciate you thoughts.
Thanks,
Mark
Peter_S
Peter_S
to throw in a third... Contax G1 and 21mm Biogon.
marek_
Established
I've already got a lens, so its just something to help frame.
sahe69
Well-known
Take the Zeiss finder, it's spectacular.
And if you are wearing glasses the 21 frames in R4M/A are a bit borderline. Even without glasses, your eye has to wander around to see the framelines.
And if you are wearing glasses the 21 frames in R4M/A are a bit borderline. Even without glasses, your eye has to wander around to see the framelines.
mfogiel
Veteran
I have both. The answer depends partly on what lens you have and if you use glasses. With glasses and a big (long) lens, the Zeiss finder is better, without glasses and with a small lens (CV 21/4, Biogon 21/4.5) R4A is an interesting option, as it also compensates somewhat for parallax. Secondly, if you like shooting with 25/28mm as well, then go for the Bessa, as it is unbeatable for these FL's.
R4A, 21/4.5
SCALE by mfogiel, on Flickr
R4A, 21/4.5
SCALE by mfogiel, on Flickr
Roger Hicks
Veteran
It's very personal, of course, but unless you only like using wide-angles, or don't mind dedicating a camera to wide-angles, I'd back the Zeiss every time.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
Timestep
Established
Perhaps only tangentially relevant:
I still use a Zeiss ( Contax ) 35mm. viewfinder, with my Nikkor 35mm Rfd. lens., on my S2.
It's an old fashioned reducing finder, and squinty;but so beautifully made.
And is amazingly accurate. Just a little "Kentucky Windage" solves parallax.
I still use a Zeiss ( Contax ) 35mm. viewfinder, with my Nikkor 35mm Rfd. lens., on my S2.
It's an old fashioned reducing finder, and squinty;but so beautifully made.
And is amazingly accurate. Just a little "Kentucky Windage" solves parallax.
View~Finder
Member
Hello,
As they say, good judgment comes from bad experience, so I feel I can comment based on my experience.
Couple of years backs, halfway through a vacation in Italy, while changing busses in Rome, the lower part of my Think Tank backpack that was attached, but not fastened to the main body, fell to the ground. It fell from a minimum height, but high enough to dislocate the delicate rangefinder of the only camera I had – Zeiss Ikon. I lost accurate focusing for the rest of the trip. Have I had my Bessa R4 in the upper compartment of the backpack, I would’ve been covered.
The Bessa R4 is small enough, capable, with great selection of wide angle frame lines and cheap enough to always carry as a backup camera. It is very convenient in use and it is handy to have a different type of film loaded in it then in your other camera.
I have the Zeiss 25mm external viewfinder and it is very bright with clear frame lines. It has marks for parallax compensation, but you have to interpret them, interpolate and approximate for the distance. The distortion is not consequential. The viewing area gives you a small margin to crop your images for fine tuning later in post processing. The frame lines of the Bessa R4 give you parallax compensation, so the framing is more precise, compared to the external viewfinder.
When I get my slides back from the processing lab, if I have not taken notes which camera I have used, I cannot tell the difference between the Zeiss Ikon and the Bessa R4A.
When I travel, bringing the two cameras and the external viewfinder gives me more flexibility and redundancy with a very minimal penalty of weight and bulk, because they are part of the same system. If you want to travel with only one camera, you can do it, but you limit your options.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Greg
As they say, good judgment comes from bad experience, so I feel I can comment based on my experience.
Couple of years backs, halfway through a vacation in Italy, while changing busses in Rome, the lower part of my Think Tank backpack that was attached, but not fastened to the main body, fell to the ground. It fell from a minimum height, but high enough to dislocate the delicate rangefinder of the only camera I had – Zeiss Ikon. I lost accurate focusing for the rest of the trip. Have I had my Bessa R4 in the upper compartment of the backpack, I would’ve been covered.
The Bessa R4 is small enough, capable, with great selection of wide angle frame lines and cheap enough to always carry as a backup camera. It is very convenient in use and it is handy to have a different type of film loaded in it then in your other camera.
I have the Zeiss 25mm external viewfinder and it is very bright with clear frame lines. It has marks for parallax compensation, but you have to interpret them, interpolate and approximate for the distance. The distortion is not consequential. The viewing area gives you a small margin to crop your images for fine tuning later in post processing. The frame lines of the Bessa R4 give you parallax compensation, so the framing is more precise, compared to the external viewfinder.
When I get my slides back from the processing lab, if I have not taken notes which camera I have used, I cannot tell the difference between the Zeiss Ikon and the Bessa R4A.
When I travel, bringing the two cameras and the external viewfinder gives me more flexibility and redundancy with a very minimal penalty of weight and bulk, because they are part of the same system. If you want to travel with only one camera, you can do it, but you limit your options.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Greg
Monochrom
Well-known
Hi, i have used zeiss and VC VF´s and some leica....but the zeiss are awesome but the VC are fine too and not so expensive...
_I think the bessa r4 is superb it also has parallax compensation as any modern built in vf...but for any other RF or digital RF you´ll need the extra vf.
does anyone has experience with the multi focal vf of voigtlander?
Is it too large?
_I think the bessa r4 is superb it also has parallax compensation as any modern built in vf...but for any other RF or digital RF you´ll need the extra vf.
does anyone has experience with the multi focal vf of voigtlander?
Is it too large?
marek_
Established
Thanks for your thoughts.
I don't wear glasses so I can see the edges of the frame, but I'd rather not have to strain looking to the edges. The lens I have is the Super-Elmar and I've been using it on a M4-P. I've tried the older Leitz 21mm finder and newer Leica 21mm finder - with both I've struggled to view comfortably. I found too much distortion and at times I couldn't see through them clearly. The viewfinder in my M4-P is nice, without distortion and I don't feel I am looking through a tube of glass. I guess I'm looking for something like the M4-P viewfinder - little distortion and comfortable to compose - though I understand this get harder with wider finders.
The Super-Elmar is my only wide - I do have an Elmarit 28 but haven't been using it much. 21, 35, 50, 90 seem to be my chosen focal lengths. 21, 35 on a Bessa R4, and 50, 90 on my M4-P? Or the whole lot on one camera + finder?
What's the distortion like on the Zeiss finder and Bessa R4 viewfinder?
I don't wear glasses so I can see the edges of the frame, but I'd rather not have to strain looking to the edges. The lens I have is the Super-Elmar and I've been using it on a M4-P. I've tried the older Leitz 21mm finder and newer Leica 21mm finder - with both I've struggled to view comfortably. I found too much distortion and at times I couldn't see through them clearly. The viewfinder in my M4-P is nice, without distortion and I don't feel I am looking through a tube of glass. I guess I'm looking for something like the M4-P viewfinder - little distortion and comfortable to compose - though I understand this get harder with wider finders.
The Super-Elmar is my only wide - I do have an Elmarit 28 but haven't been using it much. 21, 35, 50, 90 seem to be my chosen focal lengths. 21, 35 on a Bessa R4, and 50, 90 on my M4-P? Or the whole lot on one camera + finder?
What's the distortion like on the Zeiss finder and Bessa R4 viewfinder?
kxl
Social Documentary
Here's my take:
1) I use Zeiss ZI bodies. I like them, and I'm used to them, They are a good fit to my hands. So, to the extent possible, I would prefer to use the ZI.
2) A 21mm is wide enough that at f5.6, anything from about 4.5 ft to infinity will be in focus.
3) A Zeiss external VF is superb and incredibly bright.
So, while I usually despise using an external VF, given the above, I would opt for the external VF, which basically gives you a fun Point and shoot setup.
1) I use Zeiss ZI bodies. I like them, and I'm used to them, They are a good fit to my hands. So, to the extent possible, I would prefer to use the ZI.
2) A 21mm is wide enough that at f5.6, anything from about 4.5 ft to infinity will be in focus.
3) A Zeiss external VF is superb and incredibly bright.
So, while I usually despise using an external VF, given the above, I would opt for the external VF, which basically gives you a fun Point and shoot setup.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
The Zeiss finder is better than any finder ever made, in my opinion. I've owned and used 21mm finders by Leica and Voigtlander but the Zeiss wipes the floor with the competition. It's bright, has almost no distortion to speak of, it's very durable and will sell for as much as you paid for it if you decide to get rid of it.
When you put the Zeiss next to any generation Leica finder you wonder why the Leica is even in production, the difference is that great.
Phil Forrest
When you put the Zeiss next to any generation Leica finder you wonder why the Leica is even in production, the difference is that great.
Phil Forrest
kossi008
Photon Counter
Basically, no one can set your preferences for you.
Distortion-wise, the Zeiss VF is very nice, but so is the finder of the R4A/M. The CV 21/25 compact metal finder has a bit more distortion, but is still OK for composing (better than the Leicas). Plus, it's tiny!
Personally, I just like to work with a 21 mm lens like I do with a 50 mm, i.e. focus, frame, and meter with the same finder. So when I was thinking about a backup camera, I picked up an R4A. (Still kept that CV 21/25 finder for the Zeiss Ikon, just in case.
Distortion-wise, the Zeiss VF is very nice, but so is the finder of the R4A/M. The CV 21/25 compact metal finder has a bit more distortion, but is still OK for composing (better than the Leicas). Plus, it's tiny!
Personally, I just like to work with a 21 mm lens like I do with a 50 mm, i.e. focus, frame, and meter with the same finder. So when I was thinking about a backup camera, I picked up an R4A. (Still kept that CV 21/25 finder for the Zeiss Ikon, just in case.
mfogiel
Veteran
In this case, get the Zeiss 21mm finder - it is MUCH better than any Leica VF of any kind - internal or external, and has very little distortion. I find Bessa R4A VF to be too wide for anything longer than 28mm.
marek_
Established
Thanks for all the advice.
I opted to try the Bessa R4m - although it's temporally gone back due to an issue with the framelines. I haven't shot with it yet but had a play with my Super-Elmar attached. My impressions of the viewfinder were good - bright and clear, little distortion and the 21mm framelines very usable . A couple things I'm not too keen on - the framelines display quite a bit of chromatic aberration, which I find distracting but could get used to. The lens blocks a fair amount of the bottom right corner - again, I can probably get used to this.
Since the R4m went back to get fixed, I've been thinking of a Leica CL + finder. I like the idea of a second body, and with an external finder, the finder blockage would probably by eliminated. The feel of the CL is nicer than a Bessa. But I think I should give the R4m a proper go and see how that works.
Mark
I opted to try the Bessa R4m - although it's temporally gone back due to an issue with the framelines. I haven't shot with it yet but had a play with my Super-Elmar attached. My impressions of the viewfinder were good - bright and clear, little distortion and the 21mm framelines very usable . A couple things I'm not too keen on - the framelines display quite a bit of chromatic aberration, which I find distracting but could get used to. The lens blocks a fair amount of the bottom right corner - again, I can probably get used to this.
Since the R4m went back to get fixed, I've been thinking of a Leica CL + finder. I like the idea of a second body, and with an external finder, the finder blockage would probably by eliminated. The feel of the CL is nicer than a Bessa. But I think I should give the R4m a proper go and see how that works.
Mark
lawrence
Veteran
Good luck with that, if you don't like it you'll always be able to sell it as they're very popular. I had one but prefer the Zeiss finder. I've had three Bessas and finally came to the conclusion that I just don't like them as cameras compared to the ZI and M6.