wlaidlaw Posted May 6, 2017 Share #1 Posted May 6, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have just bought an ORAKO for my model III, which in spite of having its RF tweaked when it had a total rebuild and re-paint, has still got a weakish secondary image and odd eye relief, where you have to hold your eye in one position to see the secondary image. The person who did the rebuild is going to have another go at it (FOC) in the autumn and thinks he has a few tweaks up his sleeve for further improvements. Meantime, when my ORAKO arrives (and the same would apply if I got an OKARO for my post war LTM cameras) which RF lens should I put it on. I have seen folks with it on either lens. My instinct says to put it on the secondary image lens, so the the reflected (RF) image in the centre of the half silvered mirror is orange. It would seem that others prefer to have an Orange main image with a white/untinted small RF image in the middle. My FODIS and FODUA accessory rangefinders, both have a yellow main image with an untinted/white secondary image in the middle of the yellow main image. What do folks think? Wilson The ORAKO that is on the way from the UK for me at the moment 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! Quote 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/272204-orako-okaro-best-on-the-primary-or-secondary-image-lens/?do=findComment&comment=3269496'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 6, 2017 Posted May 6, 2017 Hi wlaidlaw, Take a look here ORAKO-OKARO best on the primary or secondary image lens. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
farnz Posted May 6, 2017 Share #2 Posted May 6, 2017 Wilson, I used an ORAKO on my IIIf's (these have now given way to a IIIg that doesn't need one) and I found that placing the ORAKO on the secondary image window worked better for me. If I recall correctly the ORAKO wouldn't quite fit onto the secondary image window on one of my IIIf's but I suspect that the secondary image window's round screw-in window 'frame' might have been a non-standard fix by a previous owner. Despite this, it forced me to use the ORAKO on the primary image window on that IIIf so I was able to compare it side by side with my other IIIf and I quickly found that I preferred the ORAKO on the secondary image window. I found the entire scene displayed in tobacco/orange a little off-putting and of course it made composing colour pictures quite difficult. Pete. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted May 6, 2017 Share #3 Posted May 6, 2017 It is supposed to be on the range finder window or you will have problem to screw /unscrew your lens with infinity lock 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted May 6, 2017 Author Share #4 Posted May 6, 2017 (edited) Wilson, I used an ORAKO on my IIIf's (these have now given way to a IIIg that doesn't need one) and I found that placing the ORAKO on the secondary image window worked better for me. If I recall correctly the ORAKO wouldn't quite fit onto the secondary image window on one of my IIIf's but I suspect that the secondary image window's round screw-in window 'frame' might have been a non-standard fix by a previous owner. Despite this, it forced me to use the ORAKO on the primary image window on that IIIf so I was able to compare it side by side with my other IIIf and I quickly found that I preferred the ORAKO on the secondary image window. I found the entire scene displayed in tobacco/orange a little off-putting and of course it made composing colour pictures quite difficult. Pete. Pete, I think your fitting problem may have been because for later cameras, with 11mm viewfinder objective rims, the OKARO is the correct filter. The ORAKO is for the earlier cameras with 10.1mm objective rims. I asked the seller to measure to check before sending, as it is the earlier ORAKO I need. I also measured both my Model III and a IIf to make sure I had the correct sizes. I don't really understand the problem with my Model III. It had a new half silvered mirror and everything cleaned inside. My old Model II (my grandfather's) which may never have had a CLA and desperately needs one for a very sluggish shutter, which sticks at lower speeds, actually has a far brighter and easier to use rangefinder than my III. By far the best RF on my various LTM cameras is on my Reid and Sigrist. This was a factory development mule and the serial number on the top section is much earlier than the serial number on the inner body, which is the highest number known. I assume there must have been some final tweak on the RF. I recall my previous Reid, a Model III type one but updated with flash sync, having a pretty average RF, not as good as my father's IIIa or IIf at the time. Wilson Edited May 6, 2017 by wlaidlaw Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerzy Posted May 10, 2017 Share #5 Posted May 10, 2017 early Fodis and early II have yellow/green glass in the viewer window Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted May 10, 2017 Author Share #6 Posted May 10, 2017 early Fodis and early II have yellow/green glass in the viewer window That was the only thing that made me think but JC has the answer, that the lens cannot unscrew with the ORAKO over the main window, or it will foul the infinity lock button. Wilson Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted May 16, 2017 Author Share #7 Posted May 16, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well guys I think the ORAKO should fit on the primary image window. Firstly it does not want to fit over the secondary image window (the one with the rotating prismatic glass for correcting vertical alignment), which is 10.1mm diameter against the primary window which is 10mm. I tried holding it over the secondary image window and it made little to no improvement to the rangefinding. However on the primary image window, so that you are looking at a clear small rectangle in a larger orange background, it makes a huge improvement to the ease of rangefinding. It is so much better that I think I will get an OKARO's for one of my main user LTM's, the Reid & Sigrist III. I don't think you can fit one on a IIIg, as the windows are too shallow and the RF is pretty good in any case. Wilson 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! 1 Quote 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/272204-orako-okaro-best-on-the-primary-or-secondary-image-lens/?do=findComment&comment=3276098'>More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted May 16, 2017 Author Share #8 Posted May 16, 2017 If I really want a filter for the IIIg, I will wait until I get back to the UK. There I have a large set of about 25 different sized hole punches, which I used to use for making vintage car gaskets. I can get a bit of Kodak gel (#21 Wratten mid orange seems about right) from my local friendly camera repairer/pro shop and punch out a suitable size circle, to sit in the IIIg window. Wilson Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted May 16, 2017 Share #9 Posted May 16, 2017 Film negative does quite well too, Wilson. Pete. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted May 16, 2017 Share #10 Posted May 16, 2017 Film negative does quite well too, Wilson. Pete. Yes. I've done that...works fine. cheers... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
}{B Posted June 1, 2017 Share #11 Posted June 1, 2017 I'm thinking of getting an Orako orange filter for my 111f and reading the above thread it appears that it fits over the existing window rather than replacing it. Is this correct? If so how good a fit is it? I would have thought that a push on fit would be liable to work loose and fall off. If it replaces the existing window how easy is it remove this window? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted June 1, 2017 Share #12 Posted June 1, 2017 Wilson, I used an ORAKO on my IIIf's (these have now given way to a IIIg that doesn't need one) and I found that placing the ORAKO on the secondary image window worked better for me. Could this mean that mine on the IIIg is okay after all? (Mounted on the left window looking from the front.) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 1, 2017 Author Share #13 Posted June 1, 2017 I'm thinking of getting an Orako orange filter for my 111f and reading the above thread it appears that it fits over the existing window rather than replacing it. Is this correct? If so how good a fit is it? I would have thought that a push on fit would be liable to work loose and fall off. If it replaces the existing window how easy is it remove this window? For a IIIf you need an OKARO with an 11mm sleeve at the back not an ORAKO with a 10mm sleeve, which is for Models II and III pre-war cameras. My ORAKO is a reasonably firm fit on my 1934 Model III. My OKARO (which may not be Leitz but maybe Kuhn) is an incredibly tight fit on either my IIf or Reid Model III (Leica IIIb clone). When I tried to get it off my R&S to try it on the secondary image window on my IIIg, it pulled off the primary viewing window ring with it. It would never fall off by accident. Wilson 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 1, 2017 Author Share #14 Posted June 1, 2017 Could this mean that mine on the IIIg is okay after all? (Mounted on the left window looking from the front.) Jac, The IIIg is just about OK due to the position of its secondary window but if you put it on the secondary image window on either a IIIa, b, c, d, or f, it will prevent certain lenses from mounting or unmounting as the infinity lock fouls the OKARO. The same would apply to an ORAKO on the pre-war Models II and III. Apart from that, I think it is just down to personal taste. Wilson 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickjazz Posted June 9, 2017 Share #15 Posted June 9, 2017 Well guys I think the ORAKO should fit on the primary image window. Firstly it does not want to fit over the secondary image window (the one with the rotating prismatic glass for correcting vertical alignment), which is 10.1mm diameter against the primary window which is 10mm. I tried holding it over the secondary image window and it made little to no improvement to the rangefinding. However on the primary image window, so that you are looking at a clear small rectangle in a larger orange background, it makes a huge improvement to the ease of rangefinding. It is so much better that I think I will get an OKARO's for one of my main user LTM's, the Reid & Sigrist III. I don't think you can fit one on a IIIg, as the windows are too shallow and the RF is pretty good in any case. Wilson Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickjazz Posted June 9, 2017 Share #16 Posted June 9, 2017 Wilson, interesting discussion of okaro/orako filters and rf imaging in general. My own view (through my eyes) is that they don't help a worn out beamsplitter very much. I understand the optical principal but actually don't like what they do. I also have a few iid's with the yellow window. I don't like them much either. They distract me. Most but not all of the screw mounts I have purchased needed a new beamsplitter and nearly all had dim, dirty finders, the rf window nearly always the worst. I had them cleaned with new beamsplitters installed. Still some bodies have better rf imaging and I don't know why. The subject of finders is interesting when you compare different clones to Leitz bodies. I find Canon finders to generally be brighter with better rf spots even for the early models while the later vt/vi-t/vi-l bodies have excellent finders. Nicca and Leotax also very good. I was using a 1949 Nicca - Leica iii clone - and the finder and rf are exceptionally good. I was told the camera has the original splitter and has never been CLA'd. Fast foward to a Bessa R and you have a completely different level of finder. Recently showed a heavily worn Bessa R to a long time Leica owner. He was completely stunned at the finder brightness and rf. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 10, 2017 Author Share #17 Posted June 10, 2017 Mick, Pretty much all my film Leicas have had new beam splitters, either re-silvered prisms or new half silvered mirrors. Luckily I got my older M's done before Peter at CRR in Luton retired, as he was the only person in the UK, who re-silvered the prisms. I think Alan at Cameraworks hopes to offer the service in the future, as he builds up his equipment. I know what you mean about the Bessas but the corollary is that I have not found them to be very accurate, with their short base and indifferent assembly. The best RF in my view is the Zeiss ZM Ikon, which was also built by Cosina but with a longer base and to Zeiss tolerances. This is both bright and accurate. Mind you, I have not yet tried the new larger finder on the M10, which I understand is a considerable improvement. I hope this will be carried forward to the M240 replacement. What I find the ORAKO/OKARO really helps with, is the speed of getting correct eye placement on LTM cameras. This is why I feel it is not so necessary on a IIIg, whose improved RF is much more tolerant on eye placement. Wilson Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willeica Posted June 10, 2017 Share #18 Posted June 10, 2017 I have the pre-war ORAKO in black paint (it came with a black and nickel III from 1935) and a post war chrome OKARO. I rarely use them unless a camera rangefinder has real issues. The best rangefinder that I have used on an LTM design camera is one on a Leotax K which has the orange element built in. It works better than any ORAKO or OKARO that I have used. In 'Leicaland' the best rangefinder/window I have used has been that on the M3 which, if it is in good condition, is better (albeit with fewer frame-line options) for my eyesight than the RF window on any digital M up to and including the M10. I have been told that the Zeiss and Voigtlander RF windows are excellent, but I have not tried them. William 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 10, 2017 Author Share #19 Posted June 10, 2017 The finder I was most diappointed in was on the Hexar RF camera. Otherwise it was an excellent camera and for most purposes, better than an M7. Sadly they took the worst feature of the Contax G2 VF (its small and dingy nature), removed the nice LCD panel and put in the stupid LED's from the Mamiya 6. It always surprised me that Leica has never managed to incorporate a variable diopter in their M viewfinders. When I used to use spectacles before I had my eyes CLA'd (Cleaned, Lensed and Laser Adjusted), this used to drive me potty, trying to focus through a VF with Varifocal lens spectacles. Wilson Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted June 10, 2017 Share #20 Posted June 10, 2017 (edited) I have two Hexar RF's, one silver one black, and I think of them as the camera the M7 should have been (1/4000, shutter speed displayed in the RF, auto film load, auto wind-on, and auto-rewind). I don't find the viewfinder restrictive and have used my Noctilux wide open with them at night frequently with no problem nailing focus. The viewfinder is certainly not as bright and clear as my M3 but I consider that it's not *that* far behind my M8 and M240. Pete. Edited June 10, 2017 by farnz 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.