M10R Viewfinder with 28mm lens

[hirohhhh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was always using EVFs and I just recently switched to M10R and I'm using the optical viewfinder for the first time in my life. It's kind of a drawback to me because I don't see the exact exposure as I would with EVF, but it is what is it and I'm getting use to that, but another thing that I found to be another drawback is that the frame is not as precise as on EVF, at least with my 28mm lens. I tested it by setting my camera on the tripod and align the viewfinder lines with some lines in the frame, and they were not visible on the shot. There's like 5% of the frame lost. Is this normal with all optical viewfinders, how important this is for you and how quickly did you get used to this? And is this same with all other focal lengths? I can't test is because I have only 28mm M lens.

Edited November 2, 2021 by hirohhhh

[gotium]

Yes, it’s an estimate and depends on the distance to the subject - there’s no way to get it right for all distances. 
For me, that and not being able to see the edges of the frame in the built-in viewfinder make my photography better. Trying too hard to make everything right gets in my way.

Edited November 2, 2021 by gotium

[UliWer]

The viewfinder is a fixed telescope which gives a sharp image for all distances but you have to focus your lens for different distances. At smaller distances the field of view is smaller and gets wider the further you approach infinity. So the viewfinder and your lenses field of view cannot be identical at all distances. The viewfinder frames of the M10-R are calibrated for a distance of 2m. If you focus for larger distances, you get a little bit more on you photo, if you go down to the closest distance you get less on you photo than you saw in the viewfinder‘s frame.

This is also explained in the camera‘s manual. 

Edited November 2, 2021 by UliWer

[jakontil]

I have the evf but used only with macro adapter 

its just a habit, in my case i always prefer the OVF

[Jeff S]

There is also parallax error/compensation to confuse the RF viewing experience on an M.  One gets used to all of this with experience.

Jeff

[adan]

21 hours ago, hirohhhh said:

There's like 5% of the frame lost. Is this normal with all optical viewfinders, how important this is for you and how quickly did you get used to this? And is this same with all other focal lengths? I can't test is because I have only 28mm M lens.

As to the 28 framelines - I don't use them. I use a dedicated accessory viewfinder like one of these. Which are not only more accurate, but produce a reduced-scale 28mm view that is easier to see all at once, and compose with at a glance (there are also equivalents that have been made from time to time by Cosina, Zeiss, Nikon, Canon, etc.:

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!

The field of view of the standard Leica .72x built-in optical finder has not changed significantly since it was introduced in the M2 in 1958. Sized for 35mm lenses, with a little space outside.

Leica just crammed in the 28 framelines with the 1981 M4-P and most of the cameras that followed - but did not change the actual size of the viewfinder tunnel. So it was pretty much a kludge. If one has eyes like a chameleon's, that can look up/down/left/right all at the same time ( ) and has the time, the built-in 28 lines kinda work. But they are stlil less accurate.

I don't waste my time on that.

 

[chris_tribble]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hmmm. I’m mainly a 35 person with RF cameras, but I’ve never had a major problem with a 28 - a result I suppose of several decades of familiarity! Now a 24 or 21 on an M is another story for me. I never really liked using a external VF (or EVF) and have decided to avoid ultra wides in the M and reserve the SL2 for anything that demands focal lengths shorter then 28. I can see Adan’s point, but strict accuracy of framing isn’t what I’m looking for with an M.