Is 28mm Too Wide for M9 Viewfinder?

[yanidel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Interesting. I've never considered the M series as so limited that lens choice revolves around what framelines are easiest to see. Still, if it works for you thats all that matters, after all we each have favourite lenses and fields of view.

 

Steve

M series main advantage to me is the space around the framelines for better anticipation and composition. It is not about which one is easiest to see strictly said. Yet the widest usable framelines are the 35mm IMO.

28mm on the M9 is like using a DSLR framing wise, what's in the viewfinder is the picture you get.

[wlaidlaw]

I too find the 28 lines a bit of a struggle on the M9 (using a MATE). I always end up pushing my varifocals up onto my head. The 1.15x variable diopter is not a help either. I keep it about halfway between glasses off and glasses on setting. Luckily my vision at 2 meters is not too bad so I can see pretty well at the halfway setting.

 

Wilson

[Luuk]

IMHO the only valid reason for changing focal length is the change in perspective. Thinking in FOV is `zoom`behavior.

 

Luuk

[Jeff S]

IMHO the only valid reason for changing focal length is the change in perspective.

 

While use of feet is encouraged, your reasoning has limitations if that step forward or backward puts you in traffic or into a lake. Now, that will give you a different perspective.

 

Jeff

[yanidel]

While use of feet is encouraged, your reasoning has limitations if that step forward or backward puts you in traffic or into a lake. Now, that will give you a different perspective.

 

Jeff

LOL.

[Luuk]

Not to mention the rim of the Grand Canyon

[SJP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not to mention the rim of the Grand Canyon

Agree:D

 

And for the OP the answer is "no"

[250swb]

M series main advantage to me is the space around the framelines for better anticipation and composition. It is not about which one is easiest to see strictly said. Yet the widest usable framelines are the 35mm IMO.

28mm on the M9 is like using a DSLR framing wise, what's in the viewfinder is the picture you get.

 

So you are saying that using a DSLR viewfinder will make you less able to anticipate action than using a Leica M showing the 35mm framelines? Presumably this also makes you a lesser photographer and less able to make the best photographs (by implication)? Hmmm, seems like you have read and devoured the myths lock stock and barrel.

 

While I'm no particular fan of DSLR's, I think that particular magical fairy dust is just insular and crass, of the sort that makes Leica users a laughing stock. The history of great Leica M photography does not revolve around 'space' outside of the framelines.

 

I like Leica's because they are simple, and not because of the so called 'rules and myths' of rangefinder photography, because rules once learned are there to be broken, not worshipped. Awareness of what is going on around you is far more valuable than staring into the viewfinder waiting for something or other to appear. And that is equally true for a DSLR or rangfinder, because a tunnel is just a tunnel whether 28mm, or 35mm with some space around it.

 

Steve

[wlaidlaw]

Steve,

 

I am not sure you are 100% right. I find it easier to compose well with a 50mm than a 35mm and I think it might be because I see more outside the frame. I may position the shot better in relation to the "real world". It may be because I compose and position more consciously when I see more outside the frame, against when I am using a 35 or 28, when I just take what I see.

 

Wilson

[yanidel]

So you are saying that using a DSLR viewfinder will make you less able to anticipate action than using a Leica M showing the 35mm framelines? Presumably this also makes you a lesser photographer and less able to make the best photographs (by implication)? Hmmm, seems like you have read and devoured the myths lock stock and barrel.

 

While I'm no particular fan of DSLR's, I think that particular magical fairy dust is just insular and crass, of the sort that makes Leica users a laughing stock. The history of great Leica M photography does not revolve around 'space' outside of the framelines.

 

I like Leica's because they are simple, and not because of the so called 'rules and myths' of rangefinder photography, because rules once learned are there to be broken, not worshipped. Awareness of what is going on around you is far more valuable than staring into the viewfinder waiting for something or other to appear. And that is equally true for a DSLR or rangfinder, because a tunnel is just a tunnel whether 28mm, or 35mm with some space around it.

 

Steve

Then maybe you can explain why all M external optical viewfinders have also space around them ?

And sincerely, any camera can be as simple as you want it to be, no need to buy a M for that reason.

[Jeff S]

At the end of the day, can you produce a print that's worthwhile? All the rest doesn't matter...no matter how you get there. Different strokes...not right or wrong.

 

Jeff

[cldp]

Due to aging eyes I use a diopter in my M7 and M9. It is difficult to see the edges of the frame but I am usually knocked out by the images my 28 'cron gets, so I live with the frustration in viewing. I haven't been frustrated with the framing results an love the perspective of the 28. The M7 finder is better, I ordered it a la carte and chose the wider finder. What I find interesting is that my ancient and tiny Minolta CLE has more room around the 28 finder lines that the Leica Ms. It would be nice if the M9 were available a la carte.

 

charlie-lieberman

[jaapv]

Then maybe you can explain why all M external optical viewfinders have also space around them ?

They don't all have that - for instance the 21-24-28 finder.

[yanidel]

At the end of the day, can you produce a print that's worthwhile? All the rest doesn't matter...no matter how you get there. Different strokes...not right or wrong.

 

Jeff

you are right but it also depends on what or where you shoot. For me it is : identify a potential scene, mentally pre-frame, go to he best position then raise camera to the eye, focus and ... in a city as Paris there is always someone or a car just wanting to get in your picture just when you press the shutter.... So that space around helps a lot to anticipate it. At least it helps me a lot.

 

Obviously if one mainly is out shooting landscapes in Idaho, anticipation will be much less an issue.

[Jeff S]

Exactly...not only are styles different between photographers, but even the same photogapher often uses different techniques based on the subject matter at hand. Hence, my comment that styles may vary, but what matters is whether the image got captured.

 

BTW, I was not commenting on your style, Yanidel, but rather was making a general observation. I don't think there's a right and wrong way to be a good photographer, or to use a Leica viewfinder. That's why I refused to give the OP advice, except based on his own observations about his experience.

 

Jeff

[250swb]

Then maybe you can explain why all M external optical viewfinders have also space around them ?

And sincerely, any camera can be as simple as you want it to be, no need to buy a M for that reason.

 

Because it takes into account that somebody may use spectacles and if the bright frame was all the way to the edge of the viewfinder window they wouldn't see the true frame.......????? No, hang on, that sounds to simple. It makes them cheaper to make because the lens used in the viewfinder system doesn't need to be corrected to the same degree as a camera lens (like all the way to the edge), so they just print a frameline in the middle of a less sophisticated lens?????

 

Wilson, well like you I do use the space around the framelines, when its available, but I don't think its a facility to base expensive lens purchases on. The space around the framelines is only a happy accident of the overall design. But it makes the M a sad one trick pony if the only lenses that can be safely recommended on a forum are a 50 or 35 based on what is an approximate viewfinder system at best. If however it is accepted the framelines need interpreting (like the 35mm lens gives a generous amount of image beyond the 35mm framelines on the M9), then a similar adaptation to a less than perfect system can be used for other lenses. People who regularly use a 21mm for instance will I'm sure say they'd like a conventional viewfinder, but they are willing to adapt to make the photographs they want to make. More great photographs are made due to the overall handling of the M system rather than adherence to tiny details like 'space' around the 50 and 35 frames.

 

Steve

[Jeff S]

IMHO the only valid reason for changing focal length is the change in perspective.

 

While I was responding in jest in my earlier post, I neglected the more serious response, i.e., that focal length doesn't change perspective. Only camera to subject distance does that. And, of course, that's where location limitations come into play.

 

Jeff

[Luuk]

While I was responding in jest in my earlier post, I neglected the more serious response, i.e., that focal length doesn't change perspective. Only camera to subject distance does that. And, of course, that's where location limitations come into play.

 

Jeff

Jeff,

 

You are 100% correct! But one will need the change of focal length to resize the object in the foreground to its original size. Conclusion: potentially hazerdous footwork and change of focal length are both needed to create an effective change in perspective.

 

Thanks for your part in this discusion.

 

Luuk