How to adjust for viewfinder inaccuracies on Leica IIIf | Summitar 50mm f2

[Kriah]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello everyone, ive watched many vidoes and guides about how to shoot a IIIf, but none really talk about how to compensate for paralax inaccuracies on the viewfinder for 50mm lenses.

I have a Summitar 50mm f2, going to shoot my first roll with it and wanted to ask how i would best adjust my framing on the viewfinder so that i get what i see on film.

Some guides briefly talk about "just frame a bit lower to preserver the upper parts of the shot because the viewfinder is shifted down vertically a bit" is that accurate? or is there also some horizontal shift going on? Also at which distances is it important to correct for shifting. 

Thank you very much for your time.

[luigi bertolotti]

There is no built in facility for parallax correction on IIIf (IIIG is the only LTM body with) : not a significant issue over 2-3 meters... to avoid the problem, you can always find an addon Viewfinder for 50mm with parallax correction (on the vertical side - the shoe in which you fit the finder is almost exactly positioned on the horizontal side) - beware, the excellent and common SBOOI has no parallax correction

[Advertisement]

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

[Anbaric]

1 hour ago, Kriah said:

Some guides briefly talk about "just frame a bit lower to preserver the upper parts of the shot because the viewfinder is shifted down vertically a bit" is that accurate? or is there also some horizontal shift going on? Also at which distances is it important to correct for shifting.

There is vertical and horizonal shift:

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!

But it's only really important at quite short distances with a 50mm lens.

[BernardC]

The parallax inaccuracy is exactly the distance between the center of the lens and the center of the viewfinder, so around 5cm. That's why you need to compensate at closer distances, 5cm is irrelevant at infinity, but it's significant at closer distances.

I think Hasselblad had an accessory tripod base for their Super Wide that lifted the camera by the right amount so you could frame with the viewfinder and lift the camera up so that the taking lens ends-up where the viewfinder was.

Some viewfinders have a mark showing the bottom frame edge at minimum focus distance. In practice you don't need to worry about this too much, just keep in mind that your frame will be slightly lower when you focus close. That's with a viewfinder that clips onto the accessory shoe. If you use the built-in viewfinder you also need to shift the frame slightly to the right.

[spydrxx]

For most general usage it really isn't an issue, unless you are contemplating headshots or closeups. With a little practice you should be able to "automatically" compensate as thousands before you have done.

[Kriah]

vor 9 Minuten schrieb spydrxx:

For most general usage it really isn't an issue, unless you are contemplating headshots or closeups. With a little practice you should be able to "automatically" compensate as thousands before you have done.

 

vor 27 Minuten schrieb Anbaric:

There is vertical and horizonal shift:

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!

But it's only really important at quite short distances with a 50mm lens.

Closeups are what im trying to find info about then. Im looking for information on how to compensate on closer distances. What Anabaric wrote shows a quite significant shift in both axies, but is that just exaggerated for illustrative purposes or is it actually that bad? Is it also a original Leica diagram or just a general one? The camera doesnt look like a IIIf.

 

I was looking for something like; at closer to 3m you need to compensate a bit in "exmaple direction". Stuff like that.

[Kriah]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 47 Minuten schrieb Anbaric:

There is vertical and horizonal shift:

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!

But it's only really important at quite short distances with a 50mm lens.

Can you define short distances, and does this diagram apply accurately to the IIIf?

[spydrxx]

• Quote
• "Closeups are what im trying to find info about then. Im looking for information on how to compensate on closer distances. What Anabaric wrote shows a quite significant shift in both axies, but is that just exaggerated for illustrative purposes or is it actually that bad? Is it also a original Leica diagram or just a general one? The camera doesnt look like a IIIf.

 

I was looking for something like; at closer to 3m you need to compensate a bit in "exmaple direction". Stuff like that." 

 

Since each person has slightly different techniques, you might be best served by using a sacrificial roll to see exactly how it will work for you rather than rely on anecdotal guidance on how much to shift. The photos you see in guides are only for illustration purposes, not to be taken as absolute. This is a case of learning by doing.

[BernardC]

11 minutes ago, Kriah said:

I was looking for something like; at closer to 3m you need to compensate a bit in "exmaple direction". Stuff like that.

The amount of compensation needed will be exactly equal, in distance and direction, to distance between the center of your lens and the center of your viewfinder. You can either move the camera by this small amount, or re-frame by this amount.

For instance, if said distance is 5cm, you can adjust your framing so that you cut-off 5cm from the bottom of the viewfinder image.

The image posted earlier is misleading, because a few centimeters of parallax will never cut-of a person's entire head. It might do for a small Barbie-style doll.

You'll need to test if your viewfinder is already partially adjusted for parallax. For instance, it could be accurate for 3m instead of infinity. That's easy enough to do with measuring tape: take a picture of said tape at a known distance, write down what you saw in the viewfinder, and check your negatives to see if you need to compensate. Check every dimension, of course, because the viewfinder is usually slightly "zoomed-in" to compensate for slide mounts, negative holders, etc.

[Kriah]

Yeah, thanks guys i think i will shot a sacrificial role, i understand that its difficult to translate this concept into words. Definately helped though!

[Kriah]

vor 15 Minuten schrieb BernardC:

Check every dimension, of course, because the viewfinder is usually slightly "zoomed-in" to compensate for slide mounts, negative holders, etc.

Can you explain what you mean with slidemounts and negative holders? and what you mean with zoomed in? Please.

[Anbaric]

That diagram is just to illustrate the issue, not an accurate representation of the problem. Cameras aren't usually nearly as large as people! 😊

How long is a piece of string? The error is more of an issue around the minimum focusing distance of the lens (1m) than it is at infinity. Look through the viewfinder, note where the lens is, then move the camera slightly so that the viewfinder is where the lens was and look through the viewfinder again. How much difference do you see? If you want to get fancy, you can try this on a tripod and change the position precisely.

In normal shooting it isn't something I worry about at all.

Edited February 28 by Anbaric

[BernardC]

2 minutes ago, Kriah said:

Can you explain what you mean with slidemounts and negative holders? and what you mean with zoomed in? Please.

Slide mounts typically crop-off the last millimeter or so of the slide, so you see 23x35mm instead of 24x36mm. Most negative carriers do the same for enlargements, although it's common to file them in order to print all the way to the edge. That was done because different cameras have a slightly different frame sizes. My Model III's negs go all the way to the top of the sprocket holes, and have a tiny gap between adjacent frames.

By "zoomed-in" I mean that viewfinders show a slightly tighter crop than what ends-up on film. Only a few "professional" SLRs had 100% viewfinders, because it was too costly to do on the production line.

[Kriah]

Ah okay, thanks guys!

[Kriah]

Can you guys recommend the VIOOH viewfinder or is it a bit meh? It seems to be alot more afordable and also covers multiple focal ranges.

[earleygallery]

You don’t try to frame too accurately with one of these cameras, shoot loose!!

I have made this point in the numerous threads on here and elsewhere about the legendary ‘Leica look’.

IMHO the look is that looser style of shooting, at a time when most serious photographers were using sheet film or plate cameras and 120 was considered a small negative size, the compact Leica offered a different more casual approach.

If you want accuracy use an SLR.

Edited February 28 by earleygallery

[Anbaric]

1 hour ago, Kriah said:

Can you guys recommend the VIOOH viewfinder or is it a bit meh? It seems to be alot more afordable and also covers multiple focal ranges.

It's usable but I'm not a big fan. The individual Leica brightline finders are much nicer, as are some third party finders like the ones from Voigtländer. The VIOOH just crops down the field of view as required, so it's 'tunnel vision' at longer focal lengths and there are no frame lines.

Edited February 28 by Anbaric

[qqphot]

10 hours ago, Kriah said:

Can you guys recommend the VIOOH viewfinder or is it a bit meh? It seems to be alot more afordable and also covers multiple focal ranges.

VIOOH is accurate both with framing and parallax correction for a range of focal length lenses, and has clean sharp edges to the framed view, which is nice. It's just kind of bulky. The (much more expensive) SBOOI is nicer to look through, but doesn't have parallax correction, just a little dashed line to show you the maximum shift if you were to focus at the closest distance.   In practice, for 50mm and wider lenses, if your need for framing precision is greater than you get from just "tilt the camera a bit when up close" you probably should be using an slr!

[Kriah]

vor 52 Minuten schrieb qqphot:

VIOOH is accurate both with framing and parallax correction for a range of focal length lenses, and has clean sharp edges to the framed view, which is nice. It's just kind of bulky. The (much more expensive) SBOOI is nicer to look through, but doesn't have parallax correction, just a little dashed line to show you the maximum shift if you were to focus at the closest distance.   In practice, for 50mm and wider lenses, if your need for framing precision is greater than you get from just "tilt the camera a bit when up close" you probably should be using an slr!

Hey thanks for the info, I already have a slr. I just wanted to know how to get the most out of the iiif without having to sacrifice film

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[250swb]

Just leave more space around the subject until you develop an instinct for what will be cropped if you get close, no need for sacrificial films, just enjoy using the camera. You will probably have more questions after using it for a while and some initial questions you'll answer for yourself through experience and/or mistakes.