Jump to content

1.4 Magnifier


Paul J

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've put my finger on my only issue with my 1.4 Magnifier. Well not my finger literally that would leave a mushy print and make it harder to focus (boom boom) But it seems I've pinpointed that it's not a reduction in contrast that makes it slightly more demanding to focus but mine, at least, has slight optical distortion. The issue is certainly exacerbated when my eye isn't dead on.

 

The feeling is slightly akin to that of looking through someone elses glasses. Is this the case with everyone else's ? Is it just the effects of optical magnification at work or should I send mine back?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have multiple of these (from both Leica and Japan Exposures at both magnifications) and all require various degrees of central alignment to avoid distortion and accurate focussing.

 

None of these are perfect ... and you really need precise dioptre adjustment to suit your vision to get the best out of them.....

 

For my money the JE 1.35x with variable diopter adjustment is the best of the bunch. My Leica 1.4 has been retired to its little leather box.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Both Leica M magnifiers have a small negative diopter built-in. Its strength is an estimated -0.4 dpt or thereabouts for the 1.25× and an estimated -0.6 or -0.7 dpt or so for the 1.4×. So when you're normal-sighted (and young enough to not suffer from presbyopia) then you should be able to cope with the 1.25× magnifier's small diopter strength—but that of the 1.4× is too strong to be ignored for most people. I recommend a +0.5 dpt or +1.0 dpt correction lens for the 1.4× for normal-sighted persons.

 

I am slightly hyperopic so I need a +0.5 dpt correction lens on the naked M eyepiece ... I can also get away with +1.0 dpt. On the 1.4× magnifier, however, I need a +1.5 dpt correction lens.

 

Now why does Leica build these $#!% diopter effects into their magnifiers? No idea. I guess the purpose is to annoy customers (except the mildly myopic ones) and sell more correction lenses. :mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I brought up the issue with Leica some time ago and they deny any diopter difference. I do need different diopters on the 1.25x and the naked ocular.

Do you have any documentation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Do you have any documentation?

No, I haven't. I tried to meter the diopter strengths by looking through them (while mounted on the M camera's eyepiece) with the lens of an SLR camera. From the different distance settings required to get a sharp image one can calculate the diopter strengths. However I'm afraid my results weren't too accurate so I consider them estimations rather than measurements. Anyway, one thing is for sure—the diopter strength of the 1.4× is even greater than the 1.25×'s.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok. Even on the 1.25x, especially if one needs a (nonexistent) quarter strength, it can cause the magnifier to need a different correction glass from the viewfinder in my experience. Thanks for the confirmation. I thought I was starting to imagine things...:(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Both Leica M magnifiers have a small negative diopter built-in. Its strength is an estimated -0.4 dpt or thereabouts for the 1.25× and an estimated -0.6 or -0.7 dpt or so for the 1.4×. So when you're normal-sighted (and young enough to not suffer from presbyopia) then you should be able to cope with the 1.25× magnifier's small diopter strength—but that of the 1.4× is too strong to be ignored for most people. I recommend a +0.5 dpt or +1.0 dpt correction lens for the 1.4× for normal-sighted persons.

 

I am slightly hyperopic so I need a +0.5 dpt correction lens on the naked M eyepiece ... I can also get away with +1.0 dpt. On the 1.4× magnifier, however, I need a +1.5 dpt correction lens.

 

Now why does Leica build these $#!% diopter effects into their magnifiers? No idea. I guess the purpose is to annoy customers (except the mildly myopic ones) and sell more correction lenses. :mad:

 

Thanks I suspected this was the case. I would imagine it's an unintentional side effect of the design and would make it more expensive to correct it when probably some people wouldn't notice it anyway.

 

I have perfect vision in my shooting eye (blind in the other!) The problem for me is only very slight. For example at 1m focusing on something fine like text on this monitor is a bit tricky but otherwise it's really not too bad. But it's enough for me to question it and I will try checking out a +.5 diopter to correct it back.

 

Thanks for your answer it clears a lot up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...