24mm and Viewfinder

[Stealth3kpl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't have a leica body yet (waiting for an M9) but I do have a 24mm Elmarit. Is it worthwhile buying a viewfinder for it or will I cope happily using the 28mm brightline markings as a guide?

Pete

[Advertisement]

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

[dseelig]

I have a 24 lux and an m9 I would get a external viewfinder if I were you.

David

[Hacker]

Use the VF for the 24mm. The M9 goes down only to 28mm for the widest frameline.

[andalus]

Frankly, I am not absolutely sure a VF is necessary. I merely assume EVERYTHING, beyond the 28 framelines to the very edges of the entire frame, too, are going to be in the picture. One can crop, too, if necessary. Seems a lot to pay for the VF, esp if one does not consider the 24 their first choice M9 lens, or don't use it all that much.

[Bill W]

I used a 21 on my M6 without a viewfinder for years. I hated them buy that's just me. I did quite well without one. The great thing about digital is that you can see what you just did without one and adjust. I am about to get my M9 and now only have a 24 but will not by the viewfinder which is $800 I believe.

[photolandscape]

I use the CV 25mm viewfinder. It's relatively inexpensive and works well for me.

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Realistically, this is what you'll have to work with.

 

Top image - M9 viewfinder with a 24 lens mounted. Shows 35mm and 135mm framelines, and the black tunnel of the viewfinder. With a 24mm lens mounted, the 28 lines do not show, but they would be right in the fuzzy edge of the viewing area.

 

Bottom image shows what the 24mm lens will actually capture.

 

If you mash your eye right up against the finder eyepiece, don't need glasses, and can look up, down, and sideways simultaneously like a chameleon, you might be able to get a pretty fair idea of what a 24 will take in - almost, kinda, sorta.

 

If you are doing grab-ass street photography it may work. For serious composition, whether it works or not depends on your ability to kid yourself.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[doug_m]

No external viewfinder for me with a 24 on the M9. If one has to focus critically, and shoot fast to get that decisive moment, an external viewfinder will slow things down. Try your combo without it and then decide if the edge of the camera viewfinder is good enough for your needs..

[ohnri]

I don't use one on my M9 with the 21 lux. It's just not a problem.

 

Using the VF will cause you to miss a lot of shots unless you only do tripod type landscapes or use almost all zone focusing.

 

Best,

 

Bill

[lars_bergquist]

Clearly, different people have different ideas about composition. Some just go for the center and tend to ignore the margins. They would do as well -- or as badly -- with a plain gunsight instead of a finder. They do not compose, they AIM.

 

Then there are people who visualise the image as a unit, where corners are as important as the center. Years in a darkroom have made me one of these people. I compose. And not only do I use an external viewfinder for anything shorter than 28mm -- I do really prefer to use one on a M9 with a 28mm lens, because the short sides of the frame are not really visible (I do need spectacles).

 

The old man who likes to know what he is doing

[Guest]

Got a 24 Lux before 9/9/09.

While waiting for a M9 0.58 (or shorter) with a surface coating worth the investment, I use a M6 0.58 for FF 24mm shots. As I read in this forum, the framelines' window is covered with tape, so I don't have any paralax-free info, aim and compose (opening the left eye for this) using whatever skills of previsualising I have.

With a diopter correction and no glasses I like the results with my currently favorite lens (it boiled down to 50LuxA, a tri and this one for me and my two M8s) and no accessory viewfinders whatsoever.

 

Cheers!

[viramati]

IMO it is already hard to see the 28mm frame-lines in the viewfinder as they are right at the edge of FOV. personally have a Panasonic lumix 24 viewfinder that I use the Dlux 4 that is half the price and twice as bright as the leica one so I mount this on the camera and I may or may not use it but it is there for critical composition

[Benoit Petot]

I'm using a 24mm on a M9 and on a M6 (more and more rarely). I've the 24mm viewfinder but I use it only 10% of the time, when shooting. I find it useful to acquaint (or reacquaint) to the lens, but afterward, for me, the viewfinder is enough.

 

 

Generally, when using a Leica, I tend to shoot fast. With the quiet mode (re-cocking after release) This is my preferred Leicaïsh "practice":

• I compose in my head and figure the detail that I must set at the center of my frame
  
• I look discreetly at my lens and I adjust the f/stop & distance, with the camera at the height of my waist
  
• I raise the camera at my eye and I shot immediately
  
• And the camera is back in a discreet location in two secondes.
  
• So the 28 frame of the standard finder is large enough for 24
  

To do that, I need to have (and keep) a good knowledge of the frame of my lenses (24, 35, 50 & 75), so I practice a lot of framing without taking pictures when I don’t need discretion (using the frame lever for ‘standard’ lenses or viewfinder without the camera for 24mm (for that purpose a compatible low cost finder is probably good enough).

 

Aside of authorizing fast and discreet shooting, I believe that this approach has 4 benefits:

 

· With the M6, that drove me to a very high rate of “good” pictures (Technical & content). And, until now, I use the M9 as nothing else than a better M6 (sharper, better in the low lights and with all the films loaded at the same time). Things are probably going to change in the coming months

· That keeps the M simple and very discreet (no ugly protuberance)

· That makes the lens’s changes very fast

· That makes me “think and look” at the word in a photographic way all the time (isn’t pleasant to enjoy your Leïca, even when you’re not wearing it ?)

 

BTW, I have done all my processing (darkroom) for 40 years both B&W and color, so the composition is very important to me. And I don’t believing that I’m just “AIMING” as Lars says, even less using my camera as a gun substitute. Different people, different practices.

[microview]

Frankly, I am not absolutely sure a VF is necessary. I merely assume EVERYTHING, beyond the 28 framelines to the very edges of the entire frame, too, are going to be in the picture. One can crop, too, if necessary. Seems a lot to pay for the VF, esp if one does not consider the 24 their first choice M9 lens, or don't use it all that much.

 

Agree absolutely! I have the lens and don't find any accessory viewfinder a necessity.

[microview]

Different people have different ideas about composition. Some just go for the centre and tend to ignore the margins ... they do not compose, they AIM.

 

Then there are people who visualise the image as a unit, where corners are as important as the center. Years in a darkroom have made me one of these people. I compose...

 

Whilst I hesitate to cross swords with a contemporary (many of whose recommendations I have pursued), I think that cropping in post production is as much a part of picture making as composing through the viewfinder. The implication seems to be that we all want to stick to the width/height ratio imposed by the Leica (panoramic creations excepted). Which would be plain daft.

[scc]

Whilst I hesitate to cross swords with a contemporary (many of whose recommendations I have pursued), I think that cropping in post production is as much a part of picture making as composing through the viewfinder. The implication seems to be that we all want to stick to the width/height ratio imposed by the Leica (panoramic creations excepted). Which would be plain daft.

 

I tend to agree with your sentiment, especially in the digital realm.

 

Personally, I haven't bothered with a viewfinder for my 24mm Elmarit, and have had no problems composing with the M9's viewfinder thus far.

[peter_n]

I like to have the VF on the camera even though I don't use it all the time. I have three 24/25 VFs, the CV 25, the Pany 24 mentioned above, and the current Leica 24. The Leica is ridiculously expensive and not that great, the CV is the brightest but has a plastic foot that can break, and the Panasonic DMW-VF1 is the one that I use. It actually gives you a 25mm view but is all metal construction so you can leave it on the camera in the bag. It's not that expensive either.

[ohnri]

It is ridiculous to think that use of a VF is necessary for critical composition that goes all the way to the edges when using a M9.

 

Some may find it so but others, such as myself, do not.

 

Those that are in denial about this are making misleading statements about the use of an external VF.

 

It would be more accurate for them to say that they need the VF rather than incorrectly assume everyone else does as well.

 

Best,

 

Bill

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[swamiji]

This thread is humorous. I guess it's easer to use brightlines/viewfinder, but it's almost never spot on. The way I work, is to take a lens for a test drive. Get used to "seeing" what the lens sees. Then when I pick up my 12mm lens (as an example) I look at the world through 12mm eyes, etc. Use the rangefinder focusing for selecting my subject (or not), and go. Each lens has it's own nature it's better to understand the lens then a viewfinder, since it's not the viewfinder that makes the image.

[cnorall]

This evening, amazing scene in front of the house. I rush to get the 24mm on the camera. no time to worry about the viewfinder.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!