Which viewfinder for 35mm 75mm lens combination? 0.72 or 0.85?

[Dikaiosune01]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I do wear glasses. I'm toying with the idea of picking up a a-la-carte mp.

 

I do use the 75mm summilux a lot. Split with the 35mm. Pretty much 50/50. I shoot the 75 rather slowly. and the 35mm like a reflex / snap shots.

 

While the 75mm summilux will benefit from the added accuracy of being 0.85; Will I lose too much ground with the 35mm? Or increase the margin of error with the 75mm by using the 0.72 viewfinder?

Edited March 5, 2015 by Dikaiosune01

[menos I M6]

For me this is definitely the standard 0.72 finder to shoot also 35mm (and I do not wear glasses).

The 35mm frame is really in the outer perimeter and can juuusst be used on my .85 M7.

I think with glasses this will be even more difficult.

 

It is so uncomfortable I don't use the M7 for anything wider than 50mm.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[BerndReini]

I wear glasses and I am left eye dominant, meaning I look through the rangefinder with my left eye. My eye sight with the glasses is well-corrected so I have no problem focusing. I don't want to make this decision even more difficult for you, but I actually prefer the .58 frame lines for 35mm.

 

The glasses keep your eye far enough from the eye piece that it makes it difficult to see the wider frame lines, so I would definitely stay away from the .85 finder.

[gberger]

,I'm a left eye shooter, also. My MP has the .85 viewfinder, and as the previous poster noted, the 35mm almost fills the frame. I use the MP almost exclusively for my 50mm and 90mm lenses. IMO, the .72 is much to be preferred for a 35mm lens. YMMV

[250swb]

I think it's important to differentiate between 'my glasses' and glasses in general because I can see the 28mm frame of a .72 viewfinder with 'my glasses', which have flexible frames and varifocal lenses. In days gone by it was more difficult with more rigid frames, but I've always been able to see the 35mm frame clearly in a .72 viewfinder (or variations close to it) with every Leica I've owned (that has a 35mm frame).

 

So you need to try before you buy. The viewing and focusing of a 75mm lens is for most people accurate with the .72 finder, it is the 90mm and above that many start to think about a viewfinder magnifier, although it's not impossible without, just slower.

 

The simple logic of the situation is that you can add a magnifier if you get the .72, but you can't go the other way and de-magnify the .85 if you ever decide to go for wider lenses.

 

Steve

[adan]

Right at the end of my film days I had a .85x M6, and found it quite usable for a 35mm lens (wearing glasses). Not really different than seeing the 28 lines in a .72x finder. I'd love to have the option of a native .85x (or comparable) finder in the digital bodies (thicker digital bodies means the finder values are different than for film - .68x vs. .72x, e.g.).

 

I hate using a magnifier - just too clunky and protruding, and more "tunnel vision" than with a native high-mag finder.

[semi-ambivalent]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

but you can't go the other way and de-magnify the .85 if you ever decide to go for wider lenses.

 

Steve

 

But you can go to an external VF, assuming you don't despise them. That old coot Bresson didn't seem to mind using one. I don't either and I often have a 28 on my M3 just in case I can't use that gorgeous .91 VF in situ.

 

s-a

[pico]

But you can go to an external VF, assuming you don't despise them. That old coot Bresson didn't seem to mind using one. I don't either [...]

 

Yes. Can anyone think CB would be pixel-peeping at 1:1 and giving a sh*t, or freaking out and whining to Leica about a bit of back-focus?

 

If we extrapolate the advance of technology parallel to peoples expectations, Leica will eventually face law suites because their cameras did not read the clients' minds.

[250swb]

That old coot Bresson didn't seem to mind using one. I don't either and I often have a 28 on my M3 just in case I can't use that gorgeous .91 VF in situ.

 

Bresson was a pragmatist, he used the things he needed to use. To suggest that he wouldn't have jumped at the opportunity for a 28mm frameline in the camera (and not an auxiliary viewfinder) is all about you wallowing in the past and forgetting he was contemporary in all things he did for his day. He was a modern man, he was aware of all things around him regarding equipment, technique, and what was possible and what wasn't possible. It is a mistake to imagine his world was set in the warm glow of nostalgia that you hold him in, and thereby you do him a disservice.

 

Steve

[NJH]

I agree with Steve, I bought an M7 0.85x and really regretted it after a few months. Whilst I could see the 35mm framelines with glasses much like I could see the 28mm ones in my standard M6 neither are that great to use. 0.85x was brilliant though with a 90 but not enough to make it worthwhile having a camera body just for a 90.

 

Something easily missed is that the 0.85x viewfinder ruins the view of the 50 framelines with a cutout at the bottom presumably to give space for the metering LEDs. I shot it back to back with my M6 and 50mm lenses and decided I preferred shooting the 50 on the M6, its only slight smaller but has nice complete framelines. Definitely need to try for yourself and see how you feel about them.

[semi-ambivalent]

Bresson was a pragmatist, he used the things he needed to use. To suggest that he wouldn't have jumped at the opportunity for a 28mm frameline in the camera (and not an auxiliary viewfinder) is all about you wallowing in the past and forgetting he was contemporary in all things he did for his day. He was a modern man, he was aware of all things around him regarding equipment, technique, and what was possible and what wasn't possible. It is a mistake to imagine his world was set in the warm glow of nostalgia that you hold him in, and thereby you do him a disservice.

 

Steve

 

I don't consider "old coot" to be a term of endearment. Otherwise, brilliant. You should write dime novels for extra income.

 

I am s-a, and I am a wallower.

[wattsy]

Right at the end of my film days I had a .85x M6, and found it quite usable for a 35mm lens (wearing glasses).

 

Interesting. I must have a weird shaped head (or recessed eyes) because I can only just see the 35mm framelines with a 0.72x VF and glasses. As Steve says, you really have to test it out for yourself because clearly it's not something you can generalise about.

[250swb]

I don't consider "old coot" to be a term of endearment. .

 

Neither do I but that's irrelevant, you are connecting him with your nostalgia and your choice of camera in the sense of 'if it's good enough for HCB it's good enough for me and everybody else'. So the world stopped when he did his final photo story did it? He knew it hadn't because he took up his brushes and started painting again.

 

Steve

[Dennis]

 

On 3/5/2015 at 12:17 AM, menos I M6 said:

The 35mm frame is really in the outer perimeter and can juuusst be used on my .85 M7.

So, I have a question, to understand how it works.

Two scenarios. 0.72x with a 28mm AND 0.85x with a 35mm. Do the frame lines feel the same, close to the edge of the VF?

I mean, to use M10 +28mm feels the same than shooting with 35mm on a M7 0.85x

Does it make sense?

[St Pete Leica]

Help,

I have the Leica MP and the Summicron 50mm f2 lens.  When mounted, the viewfinder lever sits at 12 o clock "naturally".

You can push the lever towards the lens or away from the lens to see the "other" lens frame lines, should you want to change lens for the shot.

Here is the problem:

I put the 35mm Summicrom f2 lens on and now the frameline lever goes to the 1 o clock position "naturally". So its showing me frame lines of 35mm and 135mm, then I push the viewfinder lever towards the lens to say 11 o clock, and it shows me framelines of 28mm and 90mm.  I can not get it to show me framelines for 50mm 75mm.

Again with the 50mm lens, I can get three sets of framelines, but with the 35mm lens, I can only get two sets of framelines.

Any thoughts why?  Im stumped.

[Huss]

11 hours ago, St Pete Leica said:

Help,

I have the Leica MP and the Summicron 50mm f2 lens.  When mounted, the viewfinder lever sits at 12 o clock "naturally".

You can push the lever towards the lens or away from the lens to see the "other" lens frame lines, should you want to change lens for the shot.

Here is the problem:

I put the 35mm Summicrom f2 lens on and now the frameline lever goes to the 1 o clock position "naturally". So its showing me frame lines of 35mm and 135mm, then I push the viewfinder lever towards the lens to say 11 o clock, and it shows me framelines of 28mm and 90mm.  I can not get it to show me framelines for 50mm 75mm.

Again with the 50mm lens, I can get three sets of framelines, but with the 35mm lens, I can only get two sets of framelines.

Any thoughts why?  Im stumped.

That is weird.  My MP is a .58, but I checked with my M7 which is .72.  It shows all sets of frame lines with a 35mm lens on, if I move the frame selector lever manually to the corresponding positions.

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

From having shot bodies with 0.58, 0.72 and 0.85, my suggestion is:

0.58 finder for 35mm focal length 

0.85 finder for 50mm, 75mm and 90mm 

0.72 is the best compromise for 28-35-50-75-90 focal lengths 

Going by what you say: " ... I shoot the 75 rather slowly. and the 35mm like a reflex / snap shots ... ", you could wing it with the 0.85 finder. The 35 framelines pretty much fill the finder and its more comfortable to shoot the 75mm 

[Danner]

Glasses wearer, here is my preference:

0.72 finder: 35mm - 90 mm

0.58 finder: 28mm - 50mm

0.85 finder: 50mm - 135mm

YMMV...

[01af]

According to arithmetics, 35 mm in the .85× finder is less close to the viewfinder's limits than 28 mm in the .72× finder ... by a hair or two.

But when comparing digital M cameras to analog M cameras, bear in mind that the digital framelines match the field-of-view at a focusing distance of 2 m; the analog framelines at 0.7 m. So the analog cameras' framelines appear narrower within the finder's view.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[UliWer]

You are right - in general.

Though during the "digital age" the calibration of the framelights changed a lot.

The original M8 had framelights matching a field of view at 0.7m - like the film M versions since the M2.

With the M 8.2 this was changed to 2m.

The M9 compromised on 1m (which I still think was the most sensible solution).

With the M10 they got back to 2m - though with a slightly larger "magnififaction" of 0.73 instead of 0.72 before. (I am not sure about the M Typ 240).