jaapv Posted March 7, 2012 Share #21 Posted March 7, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Not 20 questions - just trying to exclude the reasons behind needing a magnifier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 7, 2012 Posted March 7, 2012 Hi jaapv, Take a look here 1.25x or 1.4x magnifier? . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted March 7, 2012 Share #22 Posted March 7, 2012 Jaap loves the "pop" when everything is in absolutely perfect coincidence in the rangefinder patch. If you stack a couple of magnifiers on top of each other, it is hard to see the pop because everything is dimmer and a little vague. However, just one magnifier probably never hurt anybody's results. If all you are shooting is cherry pudding--easy to see subjects in sunny light--then maybe a magnifier does not mean that much to you. Thanks - a correct diagnosis But focussing is easy in daylight whatever way - it is more during night shots that I need the contrast jump - and that the loss of brightness by a magnifier starts to be inhibiting. I am not telling anybody not to use a magnifier - on the contrary - whatever works for you works. However, I try to limit the myth that focussing is easier with a magnifier in all cases and that a magnifier is a mandatory accessory for all "difficult" lenses. That is not true, although the placebo effect certainly influences the perception. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted March 7, 2012 Share #23 Posted March 7, 2012 Like many, I wrestled with this one without the benefit of being able to try before buying. I opted for the 1.4x because it is the longer focal lenses which seem more critical when focusing. I like it, wear glasses and have no problem. It is a slight chore having to remove and refit as needed, but worth the effort. One word of advice. Mine suffered an undetected loss of retaining ring. Leica replaced the whole unit without question. So, I am doubly careful with the fitting and stowing operation. I never leave it dangling from the camera, but secure in its little case attached to the camera strap. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted March 7, 2012 Share #24 Posted March 7, 2012 My own 1.4x magnifier languishes unused in a drawer. I found that the reduction of contrast in the rangefinder patch more than offset the gain from the magnification, so that my hit probability with the Apo-Telyt did in fact drop. There may be some kind of placebo effect with certain people, but I seem to be immune to it. My condition is in fact pretty severe – I am so presbyopic that I need specs for anything more precise than brushing my teeth. Even the horizon is very blurry! With correction, my eyesight is very good on my left eye, acceptable on my right (I am a right eye focuser). I use varifocals (progressives), the same for everything from reading to stargazing. Learning where to apply the camera ocular to the right spectacle lens is easier than learning to ride a bicycle, but like that skill, it stays with you. Like with magnifiers, I have experimented with correction lenses but I have ultimately rejected them as unnecessary complications that bring no advantage. The less you pimp your M, the less there is to lose, drop and thread on. Clear advantage! LB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted March 7, 2012 Share #25 Posted March 7, 2012 What's this, 20 questions? Sorry to intrude; we're just trying to help you address your first post in which you said "I have struggled a bit with nailing focus." If your eyes are great, as you insist, you should have no such struggle. Off to other things. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetoness Posted March 7, 2012 Share #26 Posted March 7, 2012 Just received my newly designed WalterRX Eyepiece. No longer do you have to use a set screw to hold it in place on the Leica eyepiece as it now screws into the Leica eyepiece like all other magnifiers out there. However the difference with the WalterRX Eyepiece is that it is custom made to your eyeglass prescription. It is wonderful. I now get that "pop" of which Jaap speaks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted March 7, 2012 Share #27 Posted March 7, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) to lose, drop and thread on. Lars, maybe you meant "tread on", but maybe you are suggesting these "threads" are too long? My own posting above had two typos, instead of 0.85 and 0.92, which I caught too late to be able to edit. Apologies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 7, 2012 Share #28 Posted March 7, 2012 Sorry to intrude; we're just trying to help you address your first post in which you said "I have struggled a bit with nailing focus." If your eyes are great, as you insist, you should have no such struggle. Off to other things. Jeff The point is that all M lenses fall well within the ability of a user to focus, except maybe the 135 AT, but even then many users focus that one effortlessly. So focussing problems can have only three causes 1. Failing eyesight, including incorrect correction diopters of the viewfinder. 2. Faulty system calibration. 3. Technical shortcomings of the user. It pays to exclude all causes before resorting to an aid like a magnifier. A magnifier may well be useful if the causes cannot be fully corrected, if the user finds it more comfortable or as a confidence- builder, but should not be considered as a first resort imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted March 7, 2012 Share #29 Posted March 7, 2012 A magnifier may well be useful if the causes cannot be fully corrected, if the user finds it more comfortable or as a confidence- builder, but should not be considered as a first resort imo. A very sensible conclusion, though I do get a blast from looking through the .85 finder when it is magnified 1.25x and seeing 1:1. With both eyes open, it puts a whole new meaning to the phrase "extension of the eye", and well worth the price IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share #30 Posted March 7, 2012 I am totally comfortable with the idea that user error is the most likely issue with focussing. However, here were my original questions: Can people with or who have used both make any recommendation for one over the other? Also, I understand that the 1.4x gives a 1:1 view through the viewfinder. What frame lines can you see (useably) on the M9 while using the 1.4x magnifier? Do you simply get the focusing box, or do you also see the 75 frame lines? Are the 50 frame lines visible with either? I appreciate the desire to be helpful, but I don't see where these questions give rise to the suggestion that I need a diopter, I have astigmatism or anything else which impairs my eyesight. The thin depth of field and focussing issues with the 2 lenses I identified are well documented. On that basis, my questions are surely not unreasonable. Shall we talk about ND filters instead? Or simply the obvious solution of only shooting at f/8? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted March 7, 2012 Share #31 Posted March 7, 2012 Solution: fix user error. Only way to know this is to actually try different options. Nothing we say matters, as eyes and comfort and tolerance level with these devices vary between users. And that's assuming the issue is with magnification and not with other techniques potentially influencing camera motion. In the time used on this thread, you could be answering your own questions, in the only way that counts. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share #32 Posted March 7, 2012 Solution: fix user error. Only way to know this is to actually try different options. Nothing we say matters, as eyes and comfort and tolerance level with these devices vary between users. And that's assuming the issue is with magnification and not with other techniques potentially influencing camera motion. In the time used on this thread, you could be answering your own questions, in the only way that counts. Jeff Thanks Jeff - I think you're probably right. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted March 8, 2012 Share #33 Posted March 8, 2012 Lars, maybe you meant "tread on", but maybe you are suggesting these "threads" are too long? My own posting above had two typos, instead of 0.85 and 0.92, which I caught too late to be able to edit. Apologies. My own apologies – from an old proofreader, albeit in another language, this is unforgiveable. LB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asmith Posted March 8, 2012 Share #34 Posted March 8, 2012 Lars It is not unforgivable. I am sure we all cheerfully forgive you, having done the same ourselves - more than once. Alwyn Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 8, 2012 Share #35 Posted March 8, 2012 My own apologies – from an old proofreader, albeit in another language, this is unforgiveable. LB Ok. We won't forgive you, just remind you of it from time to time.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richardgb Posted March 10, 2012 Share #36 Posted March 10, 2012 My recommendation is—use the 1.25× magnifier for 50 mm and 75 mm lenses; use the 1.4× for 90 mm and 135 mm lenses. With the 1.4× magnifier, you can see the 75 mm framelines ... but just barely, it's not very comfortable, and you'll need to move the eye around in the eyepiece to see the frame's farthest corners. Doable but not recommended. I use the 1.4x with a 75/2 Summicron. No problems seeing the 75 framelines in an M9; the 50 framelines, though are on the edge of being clearly visible without moving the eye around. The accuracy of the 75 framelines is another matter - rather more appears in the picture than you'd expect... The M9's 0.68 native magnification x 1.4 magnifier would give a 'real' size of 0.952, rather less than the 1:1 but hardly noticeable in practice. Yes, screwing the magnifier on when changing to the 75mm is a bit of a pain - you learn to plan ahead for lens-changing - but gets quicker with practice. The magnifier lives happily in its little pouch (which came in a disproportionately large box!) attached to the camera strap on the left. The security chain linking the magnifier to the pouch is just long enough. The magnifier is rather vulnerable to fingers touching the lens surfaces, so perhaps this is the cause of the often-heard complaint of loss of contrast... Time now to put on my fire- and bullet-proof suit lest those complaining of loss of contrast feel slighted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted March 10, 2012 Share #37 Posted March 10, 2012 The magnifier is rather vulnerable to fingers touching the lens surfaces, so perhaps this is the cause of the often-heard complaint of loss of contrast ... That's what I suspect, too. I feel the loss of contrast is barely noticable—unless the glass surfaces of the eyepiece or the magnifier or both are smudged with fingerprints; then you might lose quite a lot of contrast indeed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 10, 2012 Author Share #38 Posted March 10, 2012 I've been using my new 50 mm lens for the last few days, with a 1.25 x magnifier, and I haven't noticed a loss in contrast. It has been a useful experience. I suspect a 1.4 x would be better though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted March 11, 2012 Share #39 Posted March 11, 2012 ..... I suspect a 1.4 x would be better though. Definitely! I always thought the 1.25x gave insufficient magnification to make it worthwhile. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted April 15, 2012 Share #40 Posted April 15, 2012 Sorry to dredge up an old post but no real clear cut answer to the question of 1.4 Magnifiers. I would like one to aid focussing my Noctilux and 75 Summilux. I tried one out in the Leica Mayfair store but it was a while ago and a rushed experience. John, did you try the 1.4 on the 50mm? Did it help focussing? I haven't had too much issues focussing but if it is going to make it even better then I will get one. Any feedback here? THanks in advance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.