Many thanks re my post .72 or .85 Viewfinder - Leica MP film

[gpwhite]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It is so simple. Examine your photographic use. If your main interest is around 35-50-75 mm go for 0.72. If you have a bias for using longer or shorter lenses pick the corresponding viewfinder.

Reading your post I suspect you would be happiest with the 0.72.

 

Don't worry about focusing the Noctilux. It is perfectly doable with all three magnifications. It just takes training. (and possibly a magnifier) But don't try and build a system around what is -in the end- a specialist lens.

 

Jaap,  you mean that the Noctilux is a lens only for special photographers, , or that you shoot it only on special occasions?

 

Some of us find the Noct rendering to have general utility...  just sayin...

[jaapv]

I know, there are many things one can do with the lens. Maybe I should get one to wear to conventions .

 

No, I mean that it makes no sense to spend the money if one's photography does not utilize the possibilities the lens offers, plus that other lenses may serve better as universal  lens. Why carry a Noctilux if one usually can get one's images using a Summilux, or an Apo-Summicron, or an Elmar-M or Summarit?

 

The Noctilux offers a specialized aspect of photography, i.e. superb shallow-DOF at a standard focal length, and to a certain extent -getting less important with fast sensors- low-light capability.

It can do the rest as well, of course, but if that is the sole purpose it turns into heavy, big and expensive.

 

Much like the Summiluxes 21 and 24 are specialist lenses. I have the Summilux 24, and do use it as a general wide-angle. But if I were not so much taken with the way it renders wide open, especially at night and indoors, it would have been a bad buy for me. I call it my specialist restaurant lens

[Advertisement]

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

[MarkP]

I met with Ziggy today over coffee. I'm sure he will post soon.  Ziggy I hope you don't mind me posting all this.

 

It was obvious to both of us that using my .72 M7 he could not see anywhere near the full 35mm framelines. He cannot work without glasses and cannot/does not use contacts.  

Ziggy is absolutely committed to a Leica RF and is only interested in lenses in the range of 21 to 50mm. So he will need to try a .58 viewfinder (although I respect Steve's comment above).

 

Ziggy is only interested in film (B&W at this stage and no intermediate digital processing).  He plans to start with a single lens which at this stage will be probably a current 2.0/35mm Summicron and will take the MP and 35 Summicron.  With Tri-X there is really no significant IQ advantage over a 1.4/35 Summilux ASPH which is much heavier, larger, and more expensive. Re the advantage of f1.4 he thinks that is only low light work will be dawn and evening landscapes.  For landscapes he may benefit from finer grain film and would quite likely need a tripod/cable release regardless. Furthermore, if he decides not to expand his RF photography an MP and 35 Summicron is a very nice simple single lens kit without over-investing in a Summilux.

 

You would also recall that Ziggy is interested in a 1.0/50 Noctilux. We discussed the lens and I showed him mine. He is aware of the advantages and limitations of this lens and that there are much better choices for general photographic use.  Japan,  Ziggy is a pastel painter so I think would love the rendering of a Noctilux (and it's colouring when he decides to use colour film) in a restaurant ;-).  He would not get one until he knows the rangefinder system works for him.

 

He is going to borrow my CL and 40mm Summicron-C for a trip in a few weeks. Although the viewfinder aperture is smaller than Leica-M cameras  it is a x0.60 nevertheless.  He can see if a rangefinder, albeit a stunted one, suits him. 

Edited April 17, 2016 by MarkP

[gbealnz]

Sounds like a very good coffee/plan.

I'll be your next patient when I am across the ditch next, and I'll even buy the coffee.

Hopefully Ziggy will bond with the CL/40.

Gary

[MarkP]

Sounds like a very good coffee/plan.

I'll be your next patient when I am across the ditch next, and I'll even buy the coffee.

Hopefully Ziggy will bond with the CL/40.

Gary

Happy to meet any time

 

Coffee should be more affordable with the current exchange rate ;-)

Edited April 17, 2016 by MarkP

[ziggy]

Thanks MarkP for your great post.

 

Yes, I met with Mark today and was totally blown away with his generosity . . . generous with his great wealth of knowledge, and his extremely generous offer in allowing me to use his Leica CL/40 to gain much valuable experience in using a Leica RF film camera.

 

As Mark commented, when he mounted his 35 to his M7, I wasn't even close to seeing the 35 frame lines . . . So I have definitely decided to go with the .58

 

Over the years (and many of them) I have posted on many forums and can honestly report that I have never met such a wonderful, friendly and most importantly, constructive group of people, free of the nastiness, that I am sure you have all experienced from time to time on various forums.

 

Thanks to all who have contributed in helping me put together my Leica jig-saw-puzzle.

 

Kind regards to all,

 

ziggy

[indergaard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks MarkP for your great post.

 

Yes, I met with Mark today and was totally blown away with his generosity . . . generous with his great wealth of knowledge, and his extremely generous offer in allowing me to use his Leica CL/40 to gain much valuable experience in using a Leica RF film camera.

 

As Mark commented, when he mounted his 35 to his M7, I wasn't even close to seeing the 35 frame lines . . . So I have definitely decided to go with the .58

 

Over the years (and many of them) I have posted on many forums and can honestly report that I have never met such a wonderful, friendly and most importantly, constructive group of people, free of the nastiness, that I am sure you have all experienced from time to time on various forums.

 

Thanks to all who have contributed in helping me put together my Leica jig-saw-puzzle.

 

Kind regards to all,

 

ziggy

 

I'm glad you got it sorted I would have loved to try a 0.58 finder myself. The combination of 35mm + need to use glasses + deep eye sockets makes it almost impossible to use the 35mm framelines on a 0.72, and also on the 0.68 of the digital M's. Even with contacts and deep eye sockets I have to mash the camera up into my eye to see the 35mm framelines well... I guess we're all built a little different.

In retrospect, I think a 0.58 finder would suit me better than 0.72 does - especially after developing a preference for the 35mm focal length. I used to prefer 50mm earlier, which made it easy to frame with the 0.72 VF.

[ziggy]

. . . Also Borge, a special thanks to you, for taking the time to send me an extremely detailed email with your thoughts and much appreciated advice.

 

It makes me feel great to have met so many wonderful people on this forum . . . most of whom I have not met in person.

 

Cheers, and many thanks.

 

ziggy

[BerndReini]

I can tell you exactly where the discrepancy lies: I wear glasses for nearsightedness. When I'm wearing my glasses, my vision is excellent. This means I can focus a Noctilux easily with my .58 finder. My problem with a .72 finder is that when I'm wearing my glasses, I can't get my eyes close enough to the finder to see the 35mm frame lines comfortably, which is why I decided on a .58 finder. 

 

So if your eyesight is bad, but your glasses provide full correction, the .58 finder is great. If your eyesight is not 20/20 with glasses, you may want to consider the higher magnification, which makes focusing easier.

 

.58 is better for seeing frame lines, .72 is better for focusing. 

[ziggy]

Very interesting BerndReini . . . Doesn't this open another can of worms ! ! !

 

 

How many of us who wear glasses, go maybe 2, 3, or more years without getting our eyesight re-examined, and our glasses updated. I wear multi focal glasses in both everyday wear and polaroid sunnies. With my glasses being multi focal, when I put my eye to the vf, it could be slightly different each time?

 

Any Leica optometrists out there who would like to weigh in?

 

What an extremely obvious observation, that we, (most certainly I) don't give a second thought to!

 

So for all of us glasses wearers . . . before agonising over which vf to get . . . first, get your eyes re-checked.

 

Sure, this won't make any difference in seeing the frame lines, but it could make a difference in whether a certain lens (in my case the Noct 1.0) could be easy to focus a .58 - whereas if I didn't have my prescription updated, I could assume the .58 would not be ideal???? . . . Then go for the .72, which focusing would not be a problem, but I would lose the frame lines when using a 35.

 

I wonder how many more can of worms we can open????

 

Cheers to all.

 

ziggy

[BerndReini]

My good friend has the bifocal problem. He uses diopter correction on the eyepiece of his Leica to correct it for his eyesight and takes his glasses off to shoot, but diopter correction is independent from rangefinder magnification. He just tried out an SL, which solves all these problems because it incorporates a wonderful optical correction that you can customize for your eyesight, but it isn't an M of course.

[animalhairs]

I shoot 28mm, 35mm and 50mm, and I definitely prefer the .58 viewfinder to the other magnifications. I don't wear glasses, and don't experience focussing issues with any of the lenses I use. 

Edited April 19, 2016 by animalhairs

[BerndReini]

One more thing I forgot: I am left-eye dominant, so even when I used to wear contact lenses, my nose got in the way of getting my eye close to the finder, so the .58 is definitely a great help.