cbretteville Posted October 17, 2011 Share #1 Posted October 17, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Anyone have experience using a 24mm on a 0.58 without an external finder? Carl Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 17, 2011 Posted October 17, 2011 Hi cbretteville, Take a look here 0.58 VF and 24mm. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
thomasw_ Posted October 18, 2011 Share #2 Posted October 18, 2011 Anyone have experience using a 24mm on a 0.58 without an external finder?Carl Yes, I used a 24mm lens on a MP .58x, composing and framing with the entire VF perimeter. It works well, much like using the entire VF perimeter for the 28mm focal length works well on a M2. I hate the added bulk of an auxiliary VF and this one way of getting good framing without one. YMMV Thomas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
azzo Posted October 18, 2011 Share #3 Posted October 18, 2011 Yes, I used a 24mm lens on a MP .58x, composing and framing with the entire VF perimeter. It works well .... +1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted October 18, 2011 Author Share #4 Posted October 18, 2011 Thanks, just the answer I was hoping for. Carl Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted October 18, 2011 Share #5 Posted October 18, 2011 +1 (just for completeness ) Cheers Stefan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted October 18, 2011 Share #6 Posted October 18, 2011 No. Sucks as much as using a 28 with a 0.72. Quite hard to have a general vision and understanding quickly. Not using an external vf is entirely possible, even with a 0.72 abd approximating. But if you are serious and if your work is worthy, give it a chance: buy an external vf. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted October 19, 2011 Author Share #7 Posted October 19, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have an excellent Zeiss 25/28 finder. No worries. Sometimes it is just more conveient to not use it. Even if I do wear spectacles which was my primary motivatiof for buying a .58 Carl Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Studio58 Posted November 5, 2011 Share #8 Posted November 5, 2011 just the info I am looking for as I consider the purchase of a film body... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
metaphor Posted November 23, 2011 Share #9 Posted November 23, 2011 I also have an MP .58, chosen because I wear eyeglasses sometimes and specifically for the 24mm FOV. For three years now I have been mostly satisfied using only the finder's coverage, and have made lots of well-composed shots. However, I almost always have to remove my glasses to frame when greater precision is needed. I believe the external finder is more forgiving in this regard, with wider margins outside the framelines, but it does introduce the need to look through both finders to focus-then-frame if one cannot prefocus. Of course, using the built-in viewfinder is a compromise: portability, simplicity, and reduced cost over perfect framing and less/no blockage. This was quite adequate for a few years; now I'm reconsidering my kit and may get an external finder. I've also concluded that I need to add a 1.4x magnifier soon to improve the use of longer focal lengths--another consideration with the .58 viewfinder (becomes .81). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick De Marco Posted November 23, 2011 Share #10 Posted November 23, 2011 I have a lovely MP 0.58. It's great for the 35 and 28 framelines, and I even like using the 50 lines with it. I have also found I can use the Zeiss 25 f2.8 without external finder and, although you have to move your eye around the edges of the finder its just fine. I prefer it to having an external finder, especially for street/reportage. I guess the 24 will be similar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.