Xa Vf?

[mh2000]

shooting my XA... wondering what others think of the RF

 

[alien8]

View finder or range finder? I like the view finder just fine. I wish the range finder spot was more defined and easier to see when focussing. Depending on high bright the background/scene is, it can become almost invisible. But I can live with it... it's such a nice pocketable camera, with manual focus, who could ask for more?

 

[mh2000]

yeah, I messed that up 🙂

I meant rangefinder... the viewfinder is nice, the rangefinder sucks IMO, but I like having it... just wish the lens was as sharp and contrasty as my Minox GL.

 

[gavinlg]

I voted "excellent" as my xa is in mint original condition with no viewfinder/RF deterioration and the patch is very bright and contrasty.

 

[Bingley]

I wish the range finder spot was more defined and easier to see when focussing. Depending on high bright the background/scene is, it can become almost invisible. But I can live with it... it's such a nice pocketable camera, with manual focus, who could ask for more?

My thoughts and experience, exactly. I've learned to cope with the now almost invisible rf patch. Otherwise, it's still going strong. I wouldn't give the camera up for anything.

 

[Matthew Allen]

I voted for 'ok' but that's based on a well used XA. It's highly subject-dependant. Sometimes I have no trouble at all focussing and at other times I simply can't see the RF patch. It's often easiest to scale focus since with the 35/2.8 you're rarely short of DoF.

Matthew

 

[ferider]

Hard to say if it could be better with such a small camera. Maybe "appropriate" would be the right word.

Best,

Roland.

 

[Solinar]

The VF on the XA is more than adequate when compared to some of my other squinty finders. The RF apparatus is sub-par.

Earlier today I compared the rangefinder apparatus on the XA with my Leica IIIf and a couple of Agfa folding cameras from the mid-1950's. The XA is in top nick, but using its RF to focus paled when compared to the old Agfas and it was absolutely spanked by the 1.5X RF on the IIIf. Therefore, I voted in the "pathetic" column with no apologies.

 

[mh2000]

mine seemed "near invisible" when I bought it brand new in 1980 (I think)... hasn't gotten any better or worse over the years. I think I voted "it's just ok"

 

[richard_l]

I bought mine new in 1980. The rangefinder patch eventually got so dim that it was useless, so I just estimated focus. Due to physical limitations, optical rangefinders cannot be very precise on cameras that small anyhow. After the tragic death of my XA (due to a collision with a concrete sidewalk), I tried a couple of AF point-and-shoot cameras, but eventually reverted to the venerable Rollei 35, which is quite easy to scale focus (most of the time).

 

[gdi]

I just shot a roll with mine today, and, oh, is that patch dim. I have had it since the early 80's and it seems much dimmer now. I'm going to put a square of tape on it as outlined by Rick Oleson - it can work wonders.. http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-165.html

 

[Trius]

I said very good. It's funny ... when you look through just to <i>look</i>, it doesn't seem impressive. But my shots are all sharp (unless my shutter speed is crazy low or I'm one malt over the line) and focus is spot on. So, it works ... mebbe I've just mind-melded to it over 20+ years. Mine is pretty clear, but not as new.

 

[racoll]

Mine has a pretty bright rf patch and it's easy to focus with, so I'd have to say that I like it. Earlier today I was looking through the ridiculously tiny vf of an Argus V-100 and trying to use the rf patch in that camera...it makes the XA seem like an slr vf by comparison.

Andy

 

[kuvvy]

I voted just okay. I remember when the XA was launched and one of the contributors to Amaateur Photographer, Victor Blackman, a news photographer tried one and raved about it. I dashed out and gopt one too, trading in my fairly new Oly 35RD. Pretty soon after both Victor and myself came to the conclusion that the rangefinder was poor and we both sold them.
Shame really as the XA is a very nice handling camera and the clamshell design protects all the glass including the viewfinder whereas most others protect only one side. That said I do own one again though this is rarely used. I think it's had maybe 3 rolls in this year.

 

[BillP]

If your rangefinder is dim, cut a small rectangle of black insulating tape, approximately 4mm by 3mm and stick it exactly in the centre of your viewfinder window on the front. You will find that this increases rangefinder contrast considerably.

Regards,

Bill

 

[shadowfox]

In low light, it sucks. With sufficient light, it's ok.

 

[Kozhe]

I voted it sucks and mine definately does! 🙂

It´s hardly usable unless you have some great contrast between objects at the focus distance. Most of the time I set before the distance and shoot with no real focusing. Kind of a bad idea since I mostly shoot with 2.8

Thanks for the trick BillP, I´m gonna test it right now!

 

[John Lawrence]

I think a lot depends on the condition. My XA was in beautiful condition and the patch was pretty clear to see - although I did find the travel (or lack of it!) on the focusing lever took some getting used to. However, I put this down to my previous experience with Leicas.

 

[zuikologist]

Mine works just fine. As others have said, try the tape over the rf patch trick, it does work.

 

[John Hermanson]

XAs (and rfs of this type) tend to gather a fine layer of dust on the rf elements, this makes everything dimmer when looking through the vf. John, www.zuiko.com