Jump to content

Glasses+rangefinders=Problem


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My biggest problem with wearing glasses while shooting rangefinders is not being able to see the framelines or even the small amount of space around them. I currently own a m6 .72 and I can't even see the 35mma framelines (let alone the 28mm framelines) without uncomfortably pushing face into the viewfinder. It's been quite frustrating, so frustrating I've decided to get contacts to encourage me to go out and shoot more. Does anyone else have this problem?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the size of your nose, the eye you use and the shape of your spectacles. I use 2 .85 viewfinders and a .72 and can see the 35mm framelines comfortably.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

"...Every glasses user has this problem..." - at least with most incarnations of the Leica viewfinder. I can't easily see the 35mm framelines on my M2, or the equivalent frames on my M8. But I have no problems with my Voigtlander Bessa R which has a similar viewfinder magnification (or maybe 'smallification' would be a better term).

 

For years it was the same with prismatic binoculars and monoculars. If you wore glasses, you couldn't see the outer field. Then Zeiss cracked the problem and others followed. Today even budget priced ones often give some degree of extended eye relief and the high grade models give long relief distances without compromising the field of view. Maybe one happy day the Leica design team will wake up to the fact that a substantial proportion of Leica users wear spectacles and struggle to see the wider viewfinder frames. Informal polls on this forum indicate that a large percentage of owners are older rather than younger, and so more likely to have vision defects.

 

In some respects the current Leica viewfinder (not necessarily the rangefinder) is inferior to those on today's Voigtlander and Zeiss Ikon cameras. Maybe spectacle wearers should begin bombarding Leica Camera AG with exhortations for getting the viewfinder out of the 1950s . . .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

"...Every glasses user has this problem..." - at least with most incarnations of the Leica viewfinder. I can't easily see the 35mm framelines on my M2, or the equivalent frames on my M8. But I have no problems with my Voigtlander Bessa R which has a similar viewfinder magnification (or maybe 'smallification' would be a better term).

 

For years it was the same with prismatic binoculars and monoculars. If you wore glasses, you couldn't see the outer field. Then Zeiss cracked the problem and others followed. Today even budget priced ones often give some degree of extended eye relief and the high grade models give long relief distances without compromising the field of view.

(...) the fact that a substantial proportion of Leica users wear spectacles and struggle to see the wider viewfinder frames. Informal polls on this forum indicate that a large percentage of owners are older rather than younger, and so more likely to have vision defects.

 

In some respects the current Leica viewfinder (not necessarily the rangefinder) is inferior to those on today's Voigtlander and Zeiss Ikon cameras.

(...)

 

The above cited, exactly matches my experiences with Leica M-, "Voigtländer" Cosina Bessa R, and Zeiss Ikon viewfinders ...

(Some detail with respect to the M viewfinder is described here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/1755681-post5.html)

 

(...) Maybe spectacle wearers should begin bombarding Leica Camera AG with exhortations for getting the viewfinder out of the 1950s . . .

I thought that they did ... I am tending to assume that Leica has some good reasons to leave the viewfinder as it is ...

 

Best,

Telyt2003

Edited by Telyt2003
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the same problem. The .58 finder helps; a good external viewfinder like Zeiss also helps, but it means moving your eye from the rangefinder to the viewfinder. As said above, both Zeiss and Cosina rangefinders have framelines that are easier to see; the Zeiss is especially nice, but then there's the problem with the shutter speeds in the finder disappearing in bright light. A Leica with a finder similar to the ZI would be nice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Been struggling with 1.25 magnifier for one year, and recently began to use reading glasses for the rangefinder. Today replaced magnifier with appropriate diopter and the difference in clarity is tremendous. All framelines visible. So I can leave specs in my pocket now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just disagree with the whole idea of 'glasses+rangefinder=problem'

 

Its not a problem for me, I use varifocals and they are fine with any of my Leica rangefinders. So lets not over egg the pudding and get hysterical, if it is a problem it's a problem for you. Try the options to see which works, one of them will.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites
I just disagree with the whole idea of 'glasses+rangefinder=problem'

 

Its not a problem for me, I use varifocals and they are fine with any of my Leica rangefinders. So lets not over egg the pudding and get hysterical, if it is a problem it's a problem for you. Try the options to see which works, one of them will.

 

Steve

 

The problem was universal, not enough eye relief for spectacle wearers, others solved it properly, Leica simply made the 35 frame smaller and thus less accurate.

Just one of many missed opportunities to develop the M sensibly (IMHO), since the M2/M3 its been compromise rather than development, the M6 (and MP/M7) viewfinder is a less satisfactory tool than the M2,

 

Gerry

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure. I think we all have such problems especially those with astigmatism which diopters cannot help, but after a while, perhaps a long while, we learn where the frame lines are without looking for them.

 

Time. It takes time.

 

But I'll put my two-bits in here for the next Leica M to put up only the frame lines for the lens in use rather than in pairs, and offer us either white or red red lines.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...sounds to me like there is some really critical framing and composing going on here. Is this really the case? Have I finally established contact with the "no-crop clique"?

Link to post
Share on other sites
...sounds to me like there is some really critical framing and composing going on here. Is this really the case? Have I finally established contact with the "no-crop clique"?

 

No, far from it, but its nice to know reasonably accuratley whats in the frame, occasionally its critical. I chose the M3 over M2 and M4 because I could see all the frame wearing my glasses, I think its a cop out unworthy of a great company such as Leica to 'solve' the problem by reducing the frame size for the 35 to something more like a 40mm. It would have been far better (IMHO) to give more eye relief as most other manufactures did so that we could see the frame more easily. Likewise the extra frames for 28, 75, and an almost useless 135 could have been switched in, perhaps as a group, my Voigtlander R2 has a switch for the frames so it can't be rocket science.

Leica lenses have always been at the forefront of performance and innovation, I wish the camera designers had been so on top of things. Leaving aside electronics in the M7 and the digital bodies, which have not always been Leica's strongpoint, the only significant advance in the M body in almost 60 years has been the ttl meter, and that was years behind other manufacturers.

 

Gerry

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, far from it, but its nice to know reasonably accuratley whats in the frame, occasionally its critical. I chose the M3 over M2 and M4 because I could see all the frame wearing my glasses, I think its a cop out unworthy of a great company such as Leica to 'solve' the problem by reducing the frame size for the 35 to something more like a 40mm. It would have been far better (IMHO) to give more eye relief as most other manufactures did so that we could see the frame more easily. Likewise the extra frames for 28, 75, and an almost useless 135 could have been switched in, perhaps as a group, my Voigtlander R2 has a switch for the frames so it can't be rocket science.

Leica lenses have always been at the forefront of performance and innovation, I wish the camera designers had been so on top of things. Leaving aside electronics in the M7 and the digital bodies, which have not always been Leica's strongpoint, the only significant advance in the M body in almost 60 years has been the ttl meter, and that was years behind other manufacturers.

 

Gerry

 

 

...Gerry, as far as I'm aware, there are no "perfect" cameras out there. As an interface, I find that the M's viewfinder works pretty well for my purposes and technique. Here's my personal story.

 

I have shot with 0.72 Ms only for years. I have always worn glasses and am critical about composition. I shoot film, which means I have to be more measured about my approach than if I shot digital. I have used lenses ranging form 28mm to 75mm (including the "renegade" Summicron-C 40mm) on my Ms. It is my contention that critical composition in the viewfinder space and around the framelines becomes better with time and awareness, particularly as the framelines are not precise representation of the actual image borders. For the record, I print full-frame only - this is my chosen path.

 

Every other person has some kind of wishlist for the M. If I had to compile mine, viewfinder revision would certainly not feature in the my Top 5 of "needs" or "wants". Then again, that's just me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My biggest problem with wearing glasses while shooting rangefinders is not being able to see the framelines or even the small amount of space around them. I currently own a m6 .72 and I can't even see the 35mma framelines (let alone the 28mm framelines) without uncomfortably pushing face into the viewfinder. It's been quite frustrating, so frustrating I've decided to get contacts to encourage me to go out and shoot more. Does anyone else have this problem?

 

Forget the contacts if you feel more comfortable wearing glasses ....

 

 

All you need to do is practice rolling your eye when looking through the viewfinder. ..

 

After a while, it'll come natural just like shifting gears when driving. ..

Link to post
Share on other sites
...Gerry, as far as I'm aware, there are no "perfect" cameras out there. As an interface, I find that the M's viewfinder works pretty well for my purposes and technique. Here's my personal story.

 

I have shot with 0.72 Ms only for years. I have always worn glasses and am critical about composition. I shoot film, which means I have to be more measured about my approach than if I shot digital. I have used lenses ranging form 28mm to 75mm (including the "renegade" Summicron-C 40mm) on my Ms. It is my contention that critical composition in the viewfinder space and around the framelines becomes better with time and awareness, particularly as the framelines are not precise representation of the actual image borders. For the record, I print full-frame only - this is my chosen path.

 

Every other person has some kind of wishlist for the M. If I had to compile mine, viewfinder revision would certainly not feature in the my Top 5 of "needs" or "wants". Then again, that's just me.

 

Pretty much agree with all of that, apart from printing only full frame. I have used just about everything you can think of in a varied career from 35mm to 20x24 (inches!) process cameras. Nothings perfect, just choose the best tool for the job and make do with the deficiences. For all its 'faults' my favourite for my own stuff (I am retired now) has been a 0.72 M6ttl for the last 5 or 6 years, although I still think the M3 is 'better' except its bulkier with 35 and meter, and slower as the meter isn't built in.

 

Gerry

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

My optician says 'if this eye was as bad (sic a prescription) as the other you could have a free dog and stick'

Partly because of this I use both eyes this is easiest with a M3 (or Canon P) as I can float the part of the brightline I can see in viewfinder onto the other eyes picture. The M3 and Canon P are both close to 1:1, but the 35mm lines 'are at the edges'.

This takes practice but is free (like the dog would be) and is really good in starlight.

It is more difficult with a M2 or M6 (0.7ish) but still possible. You need to be able to alter which eye is dominant, this is easy for me given the assymetry I have... but is still free for you as well.

My Uncle has had laser surgery, his was non elective, or would not have been if he left it longer...I'm not going to elect, I could use contacts, but this would make close work more difficult.

 

Noel

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 9 years later...

Why Leica refuses to increase the eye relief of its M series cameras is beyond me. Zeiss did an excellent job with the ZM and Leica still refuses to change the eyepiece of its long line of Ms including MP and MA. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...