Keith (M) Posted January 28, 2012 Share #61 Posted January 28, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Is that Snow Henge? If so, haven't been there since the early eighties and could not afford a Leica then. Que? The photo was taken at the Avebury Stone Circle (a World Heritage site), which happens to be just up the road from me... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 28, 2012 Posted January 28, 2012 Hi Keith (M), Take a look here Viewfinder for 21mm lens?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Jamie Roberts Posted January 29, 2012 Share #62 Posted January 29, 2012 All right James. Use a WATE set to 16mm and no finder. Shoot blindly. See afterwards if there's a useable image there. Somehere. Maybe. I value the pixels I have, just as once I valued the square millimeters of negative I had. I previsualise the picture: I see the picture I want before I take it. How can I make the actual taken picture agree with my previsualised picture, unless I use a finder? All right, close your eyes and jerk your right index finger. This is the schlock way. Not my way. The old man from Sinatra Days I don't close my eyes, Lars, nor do I jerk my index finder, but I do roll my eyes when people say quite dumb things for no reason whatsoever. Since when are you the Old Man from "I don't read a post before I respond"? First, as I mentioned, I've used a CV 15 (don't have a WATE) with very good, non-schlocky results without a finder: I don't use it that much, as I'm not shooting landscapes. Ok, so that's out of the way, I can still use the M9 with a wide angle without a finder without much problem: the subject of a shot is generally in relation to the the visible framelines in the viewfinder--and unless they're on the extreme edge of the shot, that's what counts. This is especially true from 21 to 28 on the full frame cameras. I have this thing on the back of my M9 called an "LCD." I see your digital M doesn't come with one. Use it if you value your pixels. If the action is happening so fast that you can't, and have no idea what you're getting with a 21, 24 or 28, then I suspect you're not pre-visualizing much anyway. as for your pixels, you can crop reasonably without being reduced to the level of an M8... and if I produce a non-native aspect ratio print (which I do all the time), then I'm cropping anyway! Why don't you have a wide angle finder with crop ratios on it? Or do you waste pixels in post but not in capture? Anyway--what people with a finder have is a way of working--a prejudice. It's nice if you need exactitude and don't change lenses much. And hey--if it works for you--good for you! Sinatra doesn't work for me either, though I recognize he's one of the great voices of the 20th century. But I gravitate to other voices, and there's nothing wrong with that. But please don't pretend that your way is the only way and those of us who don't follow it are hiding some psychological fear of gear. ==The Old Man Who Will Always be Younger than You. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted January 29, 2012 Share #63 Posted January 29, 2012 When I say that I pre-visualise the picture, I mean it – with the edges in place! Then I put that picture on my sensor, just as I once put it on Kodachrome, or Tri-X, or Adox KB 17. To do that, I must know where the edges of the sensor are. For that, I need a finder. Many of my subjects are in motion, or expressions and interactions are fleeting. If I would photograph by trial and error, relying on chimping, the picture would mostly be gone when I was done chimping. The decisive moment is often very short. Or as one classical Swedish press photog expressed it: "The picture approaches like a snail and disappears like lightning." Now if you are doing architecture, or archeological monuments – well then you can perhaps do with chimping, because they move v-e-r-y slowly. At least you can if you put the camera on a tripod, so you know where it pointed when you got it all wrong. But I prefer a finder even for megaliths. And no, I am not religiously beholden to the 2:3 ratio. But when I crop a picture, then I saw it cropped before I pressed the shutter release. You may think this is like shooting in a hair shirt. But I am an tough-skinned old devil with a dour Lutheran background. Y.M.M.V. The old man from the Kodachrome Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
egrossman Posted January 29, 2012 Share #64 Posted January 29, 2012 I received my 21mm Zeiss finder from B&H this week to be used with my new 21mm Super-Elmar. I'm finding that the viewfinder not correcting for the offset of the flash shoe making it very difficult for me to frame I'm sending it back and getting the Leica variant. Erik 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/170945-viewfinder-for-21mm-lens/?do=findComment&comment=1912254'>More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted January 30, 2012 Share #65 Posted January 30, 2012 I think not using a finder is a dumb scattergun approach that is bound to lead to poor results. It's really just laziness. "OK, now in the digital age, I can crop later on." Just as exposure is now only approximate. "Oh, I can always adjust it later on in pp." Perhaps it's because I am used to slides, which I can't crop or adjust later, but I'd prefer to get the picture as right as possible before I squeeze the shutter. I do agree being able to previsualize the coverage of different lenses is very helpful, to look at a scene and say that's a 50mm shot, for example. I reckon AOV is far more useful than focal length. 21mm = 92º, 24mm = 84º, 28mm = 76º, 35mm = 64º, 50mm = 45º, 90mm = 27º and so on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 30, 2012 Share #66 Posted January 30, 2012 Que? The photo was taken at the Avebury Stone Circle (a World Heritage site), which happens to be just up the road from me... Makes sense since the stones did not look high/large enough for Stone Henge. Thanks for sharing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 30, 2012 Share #67 Posted January 30, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I received my 21mm Zeiss finder from B&H this week to be used with my new 21mm Super-Elmar. I'm finding that the viewfinder not correcting for the offset of the flash shoe making it very difficult for me to frame I'm sending it back and getting the Leica variant. Erik I did the same, but still have problems exacting my frames with the Leica 21 VF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
egrossman Posted January 30, 2012 Share #68 Posted January 30, 2012 Al can you please explain? Why should there be problem using the Leica viewfinder which should sit perfectly in line with the lens? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted January 30, 2012 Share #69 Posted January 30, 2012 I received my 21mm Zeiss finder from B&H this week to be used with my new 21mm Super-Elmar. I'm finding that the viewfinder not correcting for the offset of the flash shoe making it very difficult for me to frame I'm sending it back and getting the Leica variant. Erik Both Leica and Zeiss single-length finders have their feet placed exactly in the center-line of the finder. Both M and Zeiss Ikon camera have their accessory shoes displaced laterally about the same amount. Both Leica and Zeiss understand that especially with a wide angle lens, this displacement is immaterial in relation to the general level of accuracy of these finders. So you will have the same result with the Leica finder. If you have problems with framing, you are the problem. After a long career in rangefinder shooting, I have Leica, Zeiss and Voigtländer finders for 15mm, 18mm, 21mm, 24mm, 28mm and 35mm lying around and the 21mm is in steady use. Vertical parallax should be corrected for with medium wide lenses, when the subject it at 2 meters or closer. Lateral parallax is within tolerances. The old man who has seen through them all Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted January 30, 2012 Share #70 Posted January 30, 2012 Accessory viewfinders will never be 100% accurate, or indeed the built-in range/viewfinder. According to Osterloh, "a lens set at any distance greater than its minimum focusing distance will always record a little more of the subject...than outlined by its frame in the viewfinder." I think there has to be a compromise between 100% accuracy and the hit-and-miss approach of no dedicated viewfinder for the lens being used! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satureyes Posted February 11, 2012 Share #71 Posted February 11, 2012 Just out of interest- are all Leica finders offset from the centre or just the latest versions? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redridge Posted February 11, 2012 Share #72 Posted February 11, 2012 I use my 21mm without a finder with excellent results.... just frame your subject a bit tighter than usual and let the wide angle do its magic.... I find it liberating and what makes photography fun for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manolo Laguillo Posted February 11, 2012 Share #73 Posted February 11, 2012 I do own both the Leica 24mm VF for the D-Lux 4 (the one with the metal shoe), and the Leica 24mm plastic VF, the one with the device for securing it on the camera's hotshoe (the one all black). I had first the 24mm D-Lux VF, but after investigating carefully, I spent the money for buying second hand the other one. When shooting in the 2m to 5m range there is a difference between both, because there is a difference in the way they sit on top of the camera. In both cases the shoe is off center, but in one case to the right, in the other to the left. You can see it in the pictures attached. Leica has reasons for doing that off-centering. Thanks to D-Lux 4 liveview it is easy to check how accurate the D-Lux 4 external VF is, and it is also clearly visible how sensible the lateral displacement of the plastic VF, the one for the M, is. ........................ In the Zeiss VFs (I have the 18mm one) the shoe is perfectly centered: salomonic wisdom... 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/170945-viewfinder-for-21mm-lens/?do=findComment&comment=1924290'>More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted February 12, 2012 Share #74 Posted February 12, 2012 My new metal Leica 21mm finder is NOT offset. Good reasons or none. The squinting old man Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.