Tim Isaac's eye cup/magnifiers with M8/8.2

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Another recent thread lead me to discover Tim's eye cups for the M. He apparently makes basic eye cups, as well as cups with integrated magnifiers. Each comes in either 34 or 42mm size, and the magnifier comes as either 1.25 or .85. (The basic cup does not allow for threading the Leica magnifiers or diopters.)

 

I'm curious if anyone has experience with cup/magnifier version(s), particularly eye glass wearers. I have an M8.2, and my Leica 1.25 magnifier easily loses its rubber ring (as others have noted) and sometimes comes loose itself. I'd like to consider another option, and wonder if these might work.

 

I'm also intrigued by the .85 magnifier. Would this act in a similar fashion to the .58 viewfinder I had on my M7 for wide angle use? Are there any technical issues I should be concerned with given the different framelines on the M8.2 compared to the M8?

 

Any other options to consider?

 

Thanks for any guidance,

Jeff

[marknorton]

The basic magnification of the M8 finder is 0.68, so that a 0.85 magnifier will indeed make it appear as a 0.58 magnifier; the main reason to do it is to be able to see the edges of the frame more easily but the finder will take on something of a tunnel appearance, though not as bad as the viewfinder in a cropped DSLR.

 

Accurate focussing will be more difficult, a smaller rangefinder patch and reduced effective base length but for wide-angles, you might like it.

 

No issues with framelines.

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

The basic magnification of the M8 finder is 0.68, so that a 0.85 magnifier will indeed make it appear as a 0.58 magnifier; the main reason to do it is to be able to see the edges of the frame more easily but the finder will take on something of a tunnel appearance, though not as bad as the viewfinder in a cropped DSLR.

 

Accurate focussing will be more difficult, a smaller rangefinder patch and reduced effective base length but for wide-angles, you might like it.

 

No issues with framelines.

 

 

Thanks, Mark. Guess I won't know for for sure unless I try it out. (He's willing to deal on trial basis.) I'm more inclined to replace 1.25 first, if others can attest to quality/effectiveness.

Jeff