Viewfinder magnifier 1.25x or 1.4x for 75mm lens

[juergen]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica does know.

 

Maybe I have asked the wrong person then.

 

Anyway, just try it out, if you need varifocals.

 

I have been wearing varifocals for many years now but always take them off for shooting.

 

Juergen

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

I asked Leica just now. let's wait for an answer

[juergen]

I asked Leica just now. let's wait for an answer

 

That'll be interesting, because I had asked them as well at the beginning of november.

 

Juergen

[jaapv]

Anyway, whatever else, I am convinced that the main effectiveness of a magnifier is the fact that it forces the user to look into the viewfinder in the optical axis. One of the major causes of focussing problems is looking into the thing skewed.

[01af]

Yes - there is a difference of 0.5 dioptre between the VF with or without magnifier.

Sorry—that's just plain nonsense.

 

 

There are drawbacks as well. Loss of viewfinder brightness and contrast for instance.

Loss of brightness and contrast? Maybe you should try a genuine Leica magnifier rather than those cheap Hong Kong loupes ...

 

 

Regarding the original question ... the difference between the 1.25× and 1.4× eyepiece magnifiers, regarding field-of-view, is surprisingly small. Without eyeglasses, you can see the 35 mm framelines in the M9 viewfinder with both magnifiers. With the 1.4×, however, the framelines are just barely visible, and it takes a bit of wandering around with the eye, but it's still feasible (albeit not comfortable). The 50 mm framelines are fully visible with both magnifiers.

 

With glasses and the 1.4× magnifier, I can see most of the 50 mm framelines but not the corners. The 75 mm framelines are fully visible but the corners are very close to the field-of-view's limit.

 

With glasses and the 1.25× magnifier, I can see the 50 mm framelines fully when I press the eye as close as possible to the eyepiece. Doable, but not really comfortable. The 75 mm framelines are easily visible.

 

With glasses, your mileage may vary, depending on your glasses' strength. Mine are weak positive. I am afraid you have to try the magnifiers yourself before you really can take an educated choice.

 

By the way ... when using an eyepiece magnifier and a diopter correction lens both then attaching or removing the magnifier will be a rather tedious procedure. To attach, you first have to remove the diopter lens from the eyepiece, screw in the magnifier, and finally re-attach the diopter lens to the magnifier. You cannot screw the magnifier onto the diopter correction lens.

[juergen]

 

By the way ... when using an eyepiece magnifier and a diopter correction lens both then attaching or removing the magnifier will be a rather tedious procedure. To attach, you first have to remove the diopter lens from the eyepiece, screw in the magnifier, and finally re-attach the diopter lens to the magnifier.

 

and the other way around again.

 

 

You cannot screw the magnifier onto the diopter correction lens.

 

Which in my eyes is a big drawback if you happen to have only one M6 body. But that's the Leica feeling.

 

Juergen

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Then there's the Megapearls magnifier plus diopter unit. It's discussed in this long thread...Here ...as well as others.

 

Jeff

[01af]

Which in my eyes is a big drawback [...]. But that's the Leica feeling.

It has nothing to do with Leica.

[Guest mc_k]

Anyway, whatever else, I am convinced that the main effectiveness of a magnifier is the fact that it forces the user to look into the viewfinder in the optical axis. One of the major causes of focussing problems is looking into the thing skewed.

 

This is really interesting, but I'm having trouble filling in the details. I don't see how the magnifier forces the eye to the center. As for the second part, I wouldn't know how to fill in the details to say how much an effect this has. It might be interesting to find out if it was really "major." Of course, you could make focus tests using a view from the edge, vs. the center.

 

You can center your eye by centering the outer framelines in the vignette of the eyepiece. An eyecup does not seem to be any use for centering.

[Guest mc_k]

...

You can center your eye by centering the outer framelines in the vignette of the eyepiece...

 

strike that

[jaapv]

 

 

 

Loss of brightness and contrast? Maybe you should try a genuine Leica magnifier rather than those cheap Hong Kong loupes ...

 

Had the both Leicas- sold them both. Exactly for that reason. I cannot say they were optically better than any of the cheaper copies too. Except that the Chinese ones were more practical because of the adjustable diopter. I find I focus best without magnifiers.

[IkarusJohn]

Since the other viewfinder magnifications, .58/.72/.85 and the M8/9 .68, are internal I suspect the fixed distance of 2 meters still applies.

 

Can someone explain this?

 

I have an M9. What is the VF magnification? How do I tell? I'm assuming there is no built in correction.

 

Sorry, manual not handy, and I don't recall this being mentioned.

 

Cheers - young(ish) who now wears specs for reading and a lot else

[Guest mc_k]

Anyway, whatever else, I am convinced that the main effectiveness of a magnifier is the fact that it forces the user to look into the viewfinder in the optical axis. One of the major causes of focussing problems is looking into the thing skewed.

 

I always took the second statement to mean you may get some false coincidence if your eye is not centered over the patch. Is that what is meant? Or maybe you just mean you can barely see the patch if you're too much off-center.

[01af]

Yes - there is a difference of 0.5 dioptre between the VF with or without magnifier.

Sorry—that's just plain nonsense.

Umm ... sorry²—Jaap, you're right, and I was wrong. I didn't know that and never noticed yet, but I re-checked it more carefully today. The Leica 1.25× and 1.4× magnifiers indeed introduce an additional diopter correction of approx. -0.5 dpt, so the rangefinder patch will appear closer than without magnifier—at a virtual distance of approx. 1 m rather than 2 m. They shouldn't do that, but alas, they do. That's good for near-sighted persons but bad for far-sighted or elderly ones. For normal-sighted persons, it shouldn't make much of a difference.

[01af]

I have an M9. What is the VF magnification? How do I tell?

The viewfinder magnification for the M9 is 0.68×.

 

 

I'm assuming there is no built-in correction.

That's right.

 

The viewfinder's eyepiece is set to -0.5 dpt which however must not be considered a 'correction.' It just means the viewfinder elements (i. e. frame lines, rangefinder patch, and LED display) will appear at a virtual distance of 2 m/6 ft to the unaided eye.

[Thomasru]

Not to my knowledge. What M users don't know or remember is that the M view/ranger finder is set at a fixed distance of 2 meters (7 feet). Meaning that everything you see through the viewfinder appears to your eye at 2 meters so you need glasses or a diopter lens to give you good vision at 2 meters. That is why I wear +1.5 to +2 for reading glasses but use a +1 diopter lens for normal viewfinder and a +1.5 if and when I use a magnifier. The magnifier brings the viewfinder image closer to my eye, shorter then the 2 meters. Since the other viewfinder magnifications, .58/.72/.85 and the M8/9 .68, are internal I suspect the fixed distance of 2 meters still applies. At least that is what is stated in the M8 manual and on the .85 M7 I had I still used a +1 diopter to see the RF patch clear.

 

Hi Shootist Your comments are interesting to me as I enquired at my opticians if a diopter lens would be good for me to use on my M6TTL. I also use glasses for reading but I was told that I would gain nothing by adding a diopter . Maybe it depends on the + or - correction of ones glasses and which eye is used for viewing. I tend not to wear my "reading glasses" when taking photo's and have no problem with focus though I have to take extra care when using my 135mm.

 

TomR:D

[Shootist]

Hi Shootist Your comments are interesting to me as I enquired at my opticians if a diopter lens would be good for me to use on my M6TTL. I also use glasses for reading but I was told that I would gain nothing by adding a diopter . Maybe it depends on the + or - correction of ones glasses and which eye is used for viewing. I tend not to wear my "reading glasses" when taking photo's and have no problem with focus though I have to take extra care when using my 135mm.

 

TomR:D

 

Yes it matters what your reading glasses are (reading glasses are always + diopters), how old you are (focusing at varying close in distances gets harder as you get older even with glasses) and could be the eye you use for the VF isn't as bad as your other. If you use something like +1 reading glasses and you aren't to old and the eye you use for the VF is better then your other eye then could be your VF eye has no problem adjusting to the standard VF.

The only way to tell is to go to either the doctor or a drug store that sells over the counter reading glasses and try out varying strength diopter lenses, reading glasses, and see if any of them improve the clarity of the VF & RF patch.

The only problem with a drug store, or some other store that sells over the counter reading glasses, is that most don't carry glasses below +1 or +1.25.

[jaapv]

Umm ... sorry²—Jaap, you're right, and I was wrong. I didn't know that and never noticed yet, but I re-checked it more carefully today. The Leica 1.25× and 1.4× magnifiers indeed introduce an additional diopter correction of approx. -0.5 dpt, so the rangefinder patch will appear closer than without magnifier—at a virtual distance of approx. 1 m rather than 2 m. They shouldn't do that, but alas, they do. That's good for near-sighted persons but bad for far-sighted or elderly ones. For normal-sighted persons, it shouldn't make much of a difference.

Apologies not needed, I'm wrong often enough... However, the next question is:why?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Guest mc_k]

Anyway, whatever else, I am convinced that the main effectiveness of a magnifier is the fact that it forces the user to look into the viewfinder in the optical axis. One of the major causes of focussing problems is looking into the thing skewed.

 

I have always noticed you can move your eye around and coincidence will change. However, I couldn't demonstrate any significant error with a test at 1m. There is a different opinion here:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/39211-m8-rangefinder-focusing-accuracy-any-comments.html

 

The centering may just take care of itself, because if your eye moves just a little you can't really see in the patch (M8.) I didn't find any significant difference, either, between using the edge of the patch to focus and the center.

[Guest mc_k]

For those of you that found a magnifier counterproductive, I can't help but think you are somehow cherry-picking your shots, or giving more weight to framing than focusing. The 1.25 or 1.4 mag will by definition make the rangefinder 25-40% more sensitive, and unless you're using both at the same time in dim light, contrast doesn't seem to be that much of a problem. Every time these threads come up, I take all the magnifiers off the cameras, try the "contrast" focusing thing for an hour, put all the magnifiers back on the cameras. Is this just something I won't get until I've shot for twenty years?