M11 viewfinder vs. M240 viewfinder for users with astigmatism

[orcinus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm not sure if it's just me and whether it's my eyes or the viewfinder, but i'm getting WAY more smearing (especially from bright objects, frame lines, the LED readout) when looking through the M11 viewfinder than the M240 one.

I'm chalking it up to my astigmatism, as the effect is similar to what i experience with red dot optics and similar instruments and it gets progressively worse the lower the ambient light (i.e. the wider my irises). What i don't get is why it's happening on M11 but not on M240.

Additionally, the eye relief seems much worse on M11, i need to jam my eyeball in there pretty deep to see the 28mm framelines. Using it with glasses is not feasible, except for maybe 75 and 90mm lenses.

I'm planning on ordering a -1 diopter in hope it'll alleviate at least some of the smearing. Anyone know of any better solutions for us astigmatic people?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Hans-Dieter Gülicher]

I have similar problems. But in the meantime I prefer the Visoflex expecially in combination with my M 10-R plus Apo-Summicron 35 mm (short distances up to 30 cm) or 75 mm (generally). It helps me a lot. Just I am waiting for the ordered new Visoflex 2. I assume it should take much more details compared to the old one.

Regrads Hans

[Jeff S]

I don’t own the M11, but the M11 VF is the same as the one in the M10, which has higher magnification than the M240 (.73x vs .68x), a larger diameter opening and better eye relief. Centering one’s eye is even more important in my experience.  My glasses correct for distance and astigmatism, so that is not an issue for me.  I recommend thin, flexible frames. I also add a +.5 diopter (the larger one for the M10) to better optimize focusing with my aging eyes (tested first using free trial diopters at my local optician).

Jeff

[orcinus]

8 hours ago, Jeff S said:

I don’t own the M11, but the M11 VF is the same as the one in the M10, which has higher magnification than the M240 (.73x vs .68x), a larger diameter opening and better eye relief. Centering one’s eye is even more important in my experience.  My glasses correct for distance and astigmatism, so that is not an issue for me.  I recommend thin, flexible frames. I also add a +.5 diopter (the larger one for the M10) to better optimize focusing with my aging eyes (tested first using free trial diopters at my local optician).

Jeff

I'll give a -.5 diopter a try then.
I'm nearsighted, and the viewfinder already has -.5 built in i think?

Strange that you say it has better eye relief, i'm finding i need to jam my eye into it much closer than on M240.
Might just be placebo, i'll give them a try side by side.

[Jeff S]

3 minutes ago, orcinus said:

I'll give a -.5 diopter a try then.
I'm nearsighted, and the viewfinder already has -.5 built in i think?

Strange that you say it has better eye relief, i'm finding i need to jam my eye into it much closer than on M240.
Might just be placebo, i'll give them a try side by side.

No, I use PLUS .5 diopter, along with my glasses.  But that should have NO relevance for you. And a diopter won’t correct for astigmatism*.  Correct for that first. I use glasses to correct for both distance and astigmatism.  That keeps me from having to take them on and off for general viewing. Fortunately my prescription provides for clear viewing of the M focus patch (set to a virtual distance of 2m) as well as longer distances.  The built-in minus .5 diopter is for that 2m accommodation.

Diopter strength is best determined by actual experience (or a trained eye doc who understands your prescription needs as well as M viewing).  I merely took my camera to my local optician and placed trial diopters in front of the VF (with my glasses on) to determine optimal focusing.  Then I ordered that strength  from my dealer.
 

The better eye relief of the M10/M11 is there to offset the higher magnification I noted.
 

* The Walter eyepiece can correct for astigmatism, but I think it’s clumsy and far prefer my glasses, which I need anyway.

Jeff 

 

 

[orcinus]

48 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

No, I use PLUS .5 diopter, along with my glasses.  But that should have NO relevance for you.

Yes, i know, but from what i've read, the VF has a built in -0.5 diopter value.
My spherical diopter is -1.0.
So i want to correct for that first.

And yes, i know it won't correct for astigmatism, but at least it'll reduce the load on my brain a little so there's more left to deal with astigmatism

I've tried using it with my glasses (of the thin variety), and i'm struggling to see the whole 50mm frame, with glasses butting against the VF.

PS: I don't particularly like the looks of Walter eyepiece either. Nor the price, for that matter...

Edited February 25, 2022 by orcinus

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 minutes ago, orcinus said:

Yes, i know, but from what i've read, the VF has a built in -0.5 diopter value.
My spherical diopter is -1.0.
So i want to correct for that first.

 

Not how it works…. I explained why the -.5 diopter is built in.  

I have no problem using 28/35/50 focal lengths with my M10, with glasses and a diopter.  But I’ve been used to M finders for 35+ years.  I would never have been comfortable with RF focusing without correcting for astigmatism… night and day difference for me.
 

Jeff

[orcinus]

41 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Not how it works…. I explained why the -.5 diopter is built in.  

 

Not sure i'm following.

A diopter is a diopter is a diopter.
It doesn't matter if it's built in or applied afterwards.

-0.5 + -0.5 = -1.0, which is what my *spherical* prescription is

[Jeff S]

Seeing is believing for me.  Math doesn’t equal eye comfort. I can focus clearly and comfortably at 2m (and see subjects at other distances) or not. Simple to experiment. If not near a good optician or a Leica dealer, a good dealer like Leica Miami will provide a few to test, and take back the others without problem.  Whatever suits.

Jeff

[orcinus]

On 2/25/2022 at 2:21 AM, Jeff S said:

Seeing is believing for me.  Math doesn’t equal eye comfort. I can focus clearly and comfortably at 2m (and see subjects at other distances) or not. Simple to experiment. If not near a good optician or a Leica dealer, a good dealer like Leica Miami will provide a few to test, and take back the others without problem.  Whatever suits.

Jeff

Thanks for the heads up.
I'll give it a go at an optician then.

FWIW, i've finally tried it out next to my M240 and yeah, it's not just the different magnification.
The eye-box is definitely much tighter overall on the M11, and M240 is less "tiresome" to look through. Also, i can see the LED readout just fine with or without glasses on the M240, where on M11 it's smeary and i need to shift my eyes with my glasses on to even see it.

Bottom line is - for me, using it with glasses on is a no go. I'll find a diopter that makes it comfortable and just live with the astigmatism smear.

[Jeff S]

Different magnification, larger opening, different eye relief.  Extremely important  to keep your eye centered, on the optical axis. I had no issues with my M240 or now with my M10 bodies (same VF as M11), with glasses AND a diopter. But, as I said, we’re all different, so best to actually try.

Jeff

Edited February 28, 2022 by Jeff S

[orcinus]

There’s more subtle changes than just the eye-box, eye-relief and magnification.

The framelines and the LED readout are now at a focal plane that is closer to the projected image, and roughly all in the same plane.
The image, the LED display and the framelines used to all be at slightly different planes on M240 - at least mine. Easiest to notice on the readout, as it’d remain visible against dark background if you moved your eye far enough down relative to centerline.

Paralax of the framelines is also slightly different (i’m not talking about the parallax correction, but the parallax of the framelines themselves, exhibited when your eyeball shifts around) - e.g. you can now easily observe them disappear if you try to look at them directly near the edge of the frame, and reappear if you look at the center.

In short, a lot seems to have changed since M240 in the internal optics of it.

I know this is probably borderline silly to many, but i found it a much bigger thing than the shutter sound or the placebo lag and whatnot.
I guess most people didn’t skip M10, so that also attributes to it in a way… It’s old news.

[Jeff S]

The focus patch remains at a virtual distance of 2m.  For me, that’s the most critical issue for RF focusing.  As noted, when I keep my eye centered on the optical axis, my prescription (corrected for distance and astigmatism) also provides clear viewing of the frame lines and readout.  This applied to my M240 and 3 different M10 variations, but I find the M10 VF the best to date, at least once I corrected for my vision first. Different strokes. 

Jeff

[orcinus]

Different strokes and different prescription lenses.

I’m myopic, most people here are presbyopic (on top of any astigmatism).
Additionally, lens design can vary greatly too - mine are very curved, as designed (by Zeiss), in order to have very little to no field curvature and pupil swim across the whole field of vision. Ironically, that makes it harder to use them with viewfinders.

Edited February 28, 2022 by orcinus

[Jeff S]

Exactly.. which is why my premise from the start has been to experiment, not decide by math. One can then decide to alter one or more pieces of the puzzle.  I changed frames and lenses over the years, and more recently added a diopter.  I enjoy the M/RF experience, so that’s been a priority for my vision corrections. 

Jeff

[jgbossert]

Interesting fact: I have problems seeing the 35mm frames on my M240 with my new glasses, because they are farer away from my eyes. So I went to the Leica store to try a M10. Great I can see every frameline with even some space left and right on 35mm. Then I asked for the M11, because I though it is the same viewfinder. And you know what happend? The guy from the shop told me: If you have problems with the M240 you might expereice the same with the M11. I was surprised and curious. But when I tried the M11 the 35mm framelines where not visible comfortably. Better that the M240, but wore than the M10.

I was astonished: The M11 viewfinder is not the M10 viewfindert - sadly its a step back for people wearing glasses.

Edited April 13, 2022 by jgbossert

[Jeff S]

Very interesting, as I’ve not heard about changes to any VF specs from the M10 to M11 platform.  But I’ve also not had any reason to look for myself, which is ultimately what counts.

Edit…I wonder if the surrounding rubber piece is identical.

Jeff

Edited April 13, 2022 by Jeff S