Does a 21mm need a seperate viewfinder

[macpants]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would really like a 21mm lens to finish off my basic colletion of 35mm Lux, Zeiss 50mm and 90mm Cron. I have been led to believe that in order to use the lens I MUST have an appropriate accessory viewfinder.

 

A 21mm Lux is around £4,400 and when you add a 21mm finder (£580) you end up with a bill for nearly £5,000.

 

The question is, is the complete frame on an M9 anywhere close to a 21mm angle of view and, if so, do you really need the viewfinder?

 

Thanks for any advice.

[kdriceman]

Of course you can use a 21 mm without its viewfinder, but the 21mm frame is bigger than the viewfinder on the M9 so you will struggle to get an accurate composition. I have done it with a 21mm (having forgotten the VF), but it was trial-and-error taking a shot and then chimping, adjusting, then taking another shot. It is definitely not efficient and certainly not the way to utilize a $4000 lens/$7000 camera combo.

 

You can use any 21mm viewfinder (I have a Zeiss VF to go with my 21 mm Zeiss Biogon f/2.8). However, since the M9 lens is slightly off center from the hot-shoe some compositions will be slightly off if you don't use the Leica VF. But, a new Zeiss VF is about $400 less than the Leica, so I decided I would rather have the $400 and be aware of the slight offset than to buy the Leica.

 

Long story short... if you don't get a 21 mm viewfinder with your 21 mm lens, I am sure you will be getting one after a few uses.

[Advertisement]

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

[parsod]

Yes I would say it does need a separate viewfinder. It is possible to use down to 28mm without it even if I think it is difficult to see the whole frame since I wear glasses. I have 24mm as my widest lens and I definitely use an external finder. I guess you can learn from practise to "guess" what you get in the frame but I would recommend an external finder for 21mm.

 

/Paer

[250swb]

Can it possibly be worth buying a 21mm Summilux (or any 21mm lens) and not have any idea what it is likely to record? Of course you need a viewfinder. And just as there are other 21mm lenses available, you don't need a Leica viewfinder either, so go for a cheaper one if money is tight.

 

Steve

[viramati]

lets face even at 28 mm you are sort of searching around the viewfinder if you need accurate framing so I would say without a doubt you need a 21mm viewfinder. you could look at the zeiss or voigtlander finders if you want to pay less. also the 21 f1.4 is a large lens and hides quite a lot of the in camera viewfinder

[ezc203]

I'd say it comes down to what you shoot. If you're shooting "street", or photojournalistic stuff where you're up close and personal. I think you can get away with shooting the 21mm without a VF. But if composition is key, then I would strongly advise that you do use a VF.

 

Personally, I shoot a 24mm on the MP without a viewfinder and find it perfectly fine. But that said, my shooting style does not demand critical composition. If it feels about right, it is probably okay.

[sblitz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

you can think of the outside of the viewframe as the 1/3 marks on a 21mm photo. so if you believe what is outside the 1/3 lines is essentially background and not central to the shot you can get away with it. oth, if you are ready to spend that much on a lens the extra cost of the vf seems trivial. also, i own the zeiss biogon 21mm and it more than perfect and a lot less money -- leaving plenty left to buy a vf.

[lars_bergquist]

Of course you don't need a 21mm finder. You don't need any damn viewfinder. You can shoot with your eyes closed! Viewfinders are for cissies.

 

And you don't need that silly rangefinder either. Just set focus by scale just as real men did in the old days. Now when you have paid XXXXX €/£/$ for a M9, you have bought the right to do as you please with it. Don't let self-appointed experts tell you what to do with it.

 

If you agree with the above sentiments, then you really don't need a 21mm finder ... But I think you need one.

 

The old man from the Old Days

[StephenPatterson]

I can only speak to my experience, but I would not be without my Leica 21mm external VF. I've had the Zeiss, and the CV, and both are fine, but IMHO the Leica is the most versatile to use with the M9. This is because it has an outer frame for 21mm, but also an inner frame which is 28mm (it's actual purpose is for 21mm on the M8, but the conversion works). Because of this you can "split the difference" between these two frames and have a 24mm reference. This I feel makes the Leica an extremely versatile little tool.

 

Stephen

[John Black]

I tried to use a 21mm Elmarit without a viewfinder for a couple weeks, but eventually gave up and got a 21mm finder. The M9's viewfinder is a pretty significant crop of the 21mm FOV, so framing & composition is largely guesswork in my experience. In the end 21mm on a rangefinder wasn't for me. Focusing in the rangefinder window and composing in the finder was too disconnected. Perhaps with a F4 lens it wouldn't matter much, like the new Leica 24mm 3.8, because zone focusing would be fine in most cases. If the Leica M10 adds Live View, then I'll be very interested in a 21mm again (along with tele lenses) since Live View will provide a universal solution (alternative) for any lens.

[Double Negative]

Ideally, yes. You can get away without one with a little guesswork on the framing - unlike say, a 24/25mm lens which covers just about the entire internal VF.

[drjho]

Yes... I love the 21 lux but can't imagine shooting without a viewfinder.

[StephenPatterson]

With the 21 it is pretty easy to set zone or hyper focal focus and only use the external VF (or just shoot from the hip). For street photography it's very advantageous.

[algrove]

+1

[brill64]

i'd say that you could get away without an external viewfinder if using a 24 but with a 21 i consider it essential for accurate framing on the m9. you can chimp using the screen but it's not always practical. the 21lux is a stellar, beautifully made lens but what a beast in terms of size and weight. have you considered the new 21 super-elmar 3.4? it's very 3d imagewise, compact, light and incredibly sharp..not really a low light lens one you'll easily carry everywhere with you..

[thighslapper]

You can manage quite well without .... but ....

 

You have two conflicting issues......

 

Using a finder helps composition but is hopeless at getting verticals and horizontals aligned...

 

Using the camera finder keeps everything straight but then where the frame edges are is a bit of a gamble....

 

If you don't use a finder you will almost always end up with too much sky unless you consciously make an effort to point the camera down....

 

The other problem is exposure.... if you don't meter on the foreground you will have problems.... unless the subject involves no sky at all.....

 

Plus these finders are not parallax corrected and are only accurate at distance.... as you get progressively closer you will find you will be missing bits or getting extra things in at the sides.....

 

Like everything.... once you work it out and have a bit of practice you can mentally frame and compensate for the idiosyncracies of extreme WA and manage perfectly well without one. Using a finder does not solve all the problems.

 

I have an 18mm finder I use for my tri-elmar....... main frame lines are 18, inner M8 lines handily correspond to 16 and the full finder view is 21 ...... much handier than the enormous frankenfinder....

 

Half the time I'm too lazy to use it and I can't say it has been much of an issue.....

Edited October 29, 2011 by thighslapper

[viramati]

well you could always get the rather huge Universal Wind Angle Finder

http://www.reddotcameras.co.uk/product_info.php?cPath=16_25_56&products_id=825#menu

which does offer parallax correction and will cover any future lens you want to get. even has a level bubble in it!!

[MarkP]

When you get a 21mm viewfinder do NOT get the Zeiss. It does not work which is why people (I assume thighslapper uses the Zeiss) have problems with aligning horizontals & verticals using the Zeiss VF. I had the same problem with the Zeiss for my 1.4/21 Summilux which I found unusable. You will need to get the more expensive Leica which does it's job perfectly.

 

go to:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/168679-21mm-viewfinder-leica-zeiss-4.html

 

and please see post #66 where I explain the problem with the Zeiss viewfinder.

Edited October 29, 2011 by MarkP

[kdriceman]

When you get a 21mm viewfinder do NOT get the Zeiss. It does not work which is why people (I assume thighslapper uses the Zeiss) have problems with aligning horizontals & verticals using the Zeiss VF. I had the same problem with the Zeiss for my 1.4/21 Summilux which I found unusable. You will need to get the more expensive Leica which does it's job perfectly.

 

go to:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/168679-21mm-viewfinder-leica-zeiss-4.html

 

and please see post #66 where I explain the problem with the Zeiss viewfinder.

 

Mark P:

 

Is this because of the slight offset in the Leica VF? I.e. Could one devise a mount for the Zeiss VF that would shift it's position and thus correct it's vision problem.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[algrove]

Mark P:

 

Is this because of the slight offset in the Leica VF? I.e. Could one devise a mount for the Zeiss VF that would shift it's position and thus correct it's vision problem.

 

Funny you mention that. I use the Thumbs Up double. I put the VF on the right side and a bubble level on the left. I mostly shoot landscapes and this setup works for me so there is less post leveling adjustment needed. I know many have said the bubble levels like I use are no good, but it helps me. I also have a level on my RRS head, but the square bubble is easier for me.

 

I keep wondering if I could cut the Thumbs Up and then reconnect together in order to allow correct alignment of a Zeiss VF. In the end that is just not what I have the ability to do correctly. That's me.

 

But then as many have said the Leica VF is worth the additional $300 or so.