Wearing glasses and the M8

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

Bob, Wilson - I also wonder why Leica don't introduce a built in dioptre correction. I think I might go for both adjustable magnifiers.

 

Martin

 

When you think my father's 1939 IIIC had variable dioptre, my 1953 IIF has and my 1999 G2 had, it seems rather a retrograde step that my 2007 M8 doesn't. I can only assume it must be down to cost saving.

 

Wilson

[DaveB]

I have the 1.35 magnifier from Megaperls in Japan. Ordered it on a Sunday and it was delivered to New Hampshire on Thursday.

 

I don't feel a particular need for it up through my 90mm lens, but it is the only thing that makes my 135mm useable. It works very nice. Occassionally I forget to take it off and don't even notice until I start using my 28mm CV.

 

One good thing about wearing glasses, at least in my experience, is that the distance it forces me to maintain from the 15mm CV external viewfinder results in a field of view that corresponds almost exactly with that of the 15mm CV lens after the crop factor reduction on the M8.

 

The suggestion of intraocular implants seems a little extreme, even for die hard Leicaphiles. However, if you choose the implant route, you may wish to discuss with your surgeon whether the implant could be fashioned in such a manner as to include 21mm framelines.

 

The money saved by not having to buy a universal viewfinder would go a long ways towards offsetting the expense and discomfort of the surgery.

[mreddington]

I have the 1.35 magnifier from Megaperls in Japan. Ordered it on a Sunday and it was delivered to New Hampshire on Thursday.

 

I don't feel a particular need for it up through my 90mm lens, but it is the only thing that makes my 135mm useable. It works very nice. Occassionally I forget to take it off and don't even notice until I start using my 28mm CV.

 

I don't anticipate going higher than 75 at the moment so perhaps the 1.15x would be enough. I guess it depends on the design of the glasses and thickness of the lenses.

 

One good thing about wearing glasses, at least in my experience, is that the distance it forces me to maintain from the 15mm CV external viewfinder results in a field of view that corresponds almost exactly with that of the 15mm CV lens after the crop factor reduction on the M8.

 

I had that impression at first but using the CV15 more I do find I need the 21 mm viewfinder to be able to estimate the FoV of the final image.

 

The suggestion of intraocular implants seems a little extreme, even for die hard Leicaphiles. However, if you choose the implant route, you may wish to discuss with your surgeon whether the implant could be fashioned in such a manner as to include 21mm framelines.

 

LOL

 

The money saved by not having to buy a universal viewfinder would go a long ways towards offsetting the expense and discomfort of the surgery.

 

Thankfully my eyesight is good enough to avoid this measure. But I hadn't thought of the economic implications!

 

Martin

[lars_bergquist]

When you think my father's 1939 IIIC had variable dioptre, my 1953 IIF has and my 1999 G2 had, it seems rather a retrograde step that my 2007 M8 doesn't. I can only assume it must be down to cost saving.

 

Wilson

 

This is really one of the most tenacious misconceptions in Leica history. That lever is not for dioptrical correction – it's for focusing.

 

The rangefinder of the Leica II was a 1 x telescope. With the Leica III the magnification was increased to 1.5 x, because the rangefinder base had proven too short for the long lenses. But this meant that a fix-focus telescope was not enough, you had to focus the rangefinder first before focusing the lens. Thus the lever. (This was the sort of patchwork ad-hoc engineering that has always turned me off screw-mont Leicas.)

 

But anyone who has actually tried to use one of these cameras must discover that this is useless for eyesight correction – because it does not affect the finder. If you need dioptric correction, then you need it for BOTH the rangefinder and the finder. And please note that E.Leitz recognized this and offered (hold your hat) dioptric correction lenses in pairs, to fit both eyepieces!

 

The nonsense about the 'lever for eyesight correction' has nevertheless been copied from book to book by authors that have little knowledge and less practical experience. Much other 'information' offered in these works is of the same caliber, unfortunately.

 

The old man from the Age of Encyclopedia Publishing

[Philinflash]

...

The suggestion of intraocular implants seems a little extreme, even for die hard Leicaphiles. However, if you choose the implant route, you may wish to discuss with your surgeon whether the implant could be fashioned in such a manner as to include 21mm framelines.

 

The money saved by not having to buy a universal viewfinder would go a long ways towards offsetting the expense and discomfort of the surgery.

 

Dang! I knew I forgot to ask the surgeon for something: built-in framelines!!

 

Actually, having 360-degree peripheral vision took a bit of adjustment. For instance, seeing my feet step out in front of me while walking was weird at first. But I got used to it.

 

BTW, very little discomfort. Remembering to put the eye drops in post-op was the biggest deal. And what to do with all those redundant lens cleaners...

[wlaidlaw]

This is really one of the most tenacious misconceptions in Leica history. That lever is not for dioptrical correction – it's for focusing.

 

 

 

The old man from the Age of Encyclopedia Publishing

 

Lars,

 

I have been using LTM Leicas since the mid 1950's. I have needed eye-glasses since 1971. I agree that the lever does nothing for your eyesight when you are looking through the viewfinder and hardly surprisingly so, since it is not connected to it. It does however work within a limited range, as dioptre correction on the rangefinder, even though that was not its primary purpose. If, like me your distance vision is not that far off, I can use the viewfinder without eye-glasses, but the rangefinder is not quite sharp enough for accurate image convergence, especially as the ghost image is fainter than M Leicas. Particularly for lenses over 50mm, where really precise image convergence is vital, you can use the focus lever, either on top for my later models or round the eye-piece on my earlier models to bring the image into absolutely sharp focus. It may not be as it was designed but it does work.

 

Wilson