I still struggle a bit with the Leica viewfinder and wearing glasses. Hard to see the 28mm framelines. Also, I have not yet shot something that makes me go "wow" this one I could not have taken with a Pentax and the 28mm F2. Not yet willing to give up though...
Ferry | Leica M4P | Kodak Ultramax rated at Iso 640 and developed at Iso 800 | Valoi Easy35
So even the M4P has 28 framlines but you still have difficult time look thru the viewfinder ?
I wear glasses too and also consider to get a M4P.
madNbad wrote:
Continuing with is 800 speed film 400? This is Flic Film Aurora 800 and I used a ND2 filter to reduce the speed one stop and exposed it at 400. I haven't tried it at 800 but I still have a couple of rolls.
Cute Couple, Ashland, Oregon
M4-2, Zeiss 28 2.8 Biogon, ND2 filter, Flic Aurora 800 lab processed, camera scanned and converted with Negative Lab Pro
zi464 wrote:
So even the M4P has 28 framlines but you still have difficult time look thru the viewfinder ?
I wear glasses too and also consider to get a M4P.
Yes, quite surprising to me. The 35 is already hard to see, for the 28 I need to hover around in the viewfinder. But I also have very bad eyes which may cause additional difficulties. Unfortunately the M4P is not available with the 0.58 viewfinder.
Ineound wrote:
Yes, quite surprising to me. The 35 is already hard to see, for the 28 I need to hover around in the viewfinder. But I also have very bad eyes which may cause additional difficulties. Unfortunately the M4P is not available with the 0.58 viewfinder.
That may save my money.
I have 0.58 M6 and always want to get another M as back up. After some research, the M4P became my target since it has 28mm framlines , but the 0.78 viewfinder is the problem that cause me keep thinking and thinking.
For sure, I could still get the M4P since I use my Leica as street photography / event gear and I shoot with zone focus without look thru the viewfinder half of the time.
madNbad wrote:
Continuing with is 800 speed film 400? This is Flic Film Aurora 800 and I used a ND2 filter to reduce the speed one stop and exposed it at 400. I haven't tried it at 800 but I still have a couple of rolls.
Cute Couple, Ashland, Oregon
M4-2, Zeiss 28 2.8 Biogon, ND2 filter, Flic Aurora 800 lab processed, camera scanned and converted with Negative Lab Pro
Ineound wrote:
Yes, quite surprising to me. The 35 is already hard to see, for the 28 I need to hover around in the viewfinder. But I also have very bad eyes which may cause additional difficulties. Unfortunately the M4P is not available with the 0.58 viewfinder.
The .72 just is not very good with the 28mm frame lines. The 28 lines are hard to see without glasses on any of my .72 Leicas - you have to move your eye around the vf with it jammed in there. And if I had glasses on? Nope.
.58 really is the one if you like 28mm lenses, and also I think it is the best vf for 35mm lenses as the frame lines are perfect for that too.
The .58 finder IMO is the best finder if you shoot in the 28-50 range. And if you decide to use 50 a lot, you can just screw in a magnifier. The rf base length is the same in all the Ms (apart from the M5) so the accuracy is the same. The only thing that differs is the magnification.
Desmolicious wrote:
The .72 just is not very good with the 28mm frame lines. The 28 lines are hard to see without glasses on any of my .72 Leicas - you have to move your eye around the vf with it jammed in there. And if I had glasses on? Nope.
.58 really is the one if you like 28mm lenses, and also I think it is the best vf for 35mm lenses as the frame lines are perfect for that too.
The .58 finder IMO is the best finder if you shoot in the 28-50 range. And if you decide to use 50 a lot, you can just screw in a magnifier. The rf base length is the same in all the Ms (apart from the M5) so the accuracy is the same. The only thing that differs is the magnification....Show more →
So between M6 and M7 which one you will pick ?
I know MP has 0.58 but just too expensive, I rather save those money for the lens.
I still struggle a bit with the Leica viewfinder and wearing glasses. Hard to see the 28mm framelines. Also, I have not yet shot something that makes me go "wow" this one I could not have taken with a Pentax and the 28mm F2. Not yet willing to give up though...
Ferry | Leica M4P | Kodak Ultramax rated at Iso 640 and developed at Iso 800 | Valoi Easy35
After my first visit with a new ophthalmologist, she commented she was surprised I could see as well as I do.
I've used 28mm lenses with M cameras that have the 28mm frame lines and ones that don't. I used a M2 with a 28 for a year just using the entire finder. I do a quick scan of the corners and that works well. A few years back, I decided to make the move to a dedicated finder for the M4 and M4-2. I use the 28 quite a bit and it makes framing easier. I have since sold both of the 28's in the photo and bought a Zeiss Biogon.
zi464 wrote:
So between M6 and M7 which one you will pick ?
I know MP has 0.58 but just too expensive, I rather save those money for the lens.
I prefer my M7 to my M6, because AE and AE lock is so darn convenient!
But the smart move would be to get whichever .72 M you want and a Voigtlander 28mm optical hotshoe finder as @madNbad pointed out. I have that finder and it is super bright w excellent frame lines. You would save huge money instead of getting a .58.
Desmolicious wrote:
I prefer my M7 to my M6, because AE and AE lock is so darn convenient!
But the smart move would be to get whichever .72 M you want and a Voigtlander 28mm optical hotshoe finder as @madNbad@ pointed out. I have that finder and it is super bright w excellent frame lines. You would save huge money instead of getting a .58.
Sure, though that kind of contradicts for me the idea of being able to use fast lenses / faster than SLR lenses. Because you would need to step down for focusing first and then composing through the viewfinder.... right?
Ineound wrote:
Sure, though that kind of contradicts for me the idea of being able to use fast lenses / faster than SLR lenses. Because you would need to step down for focusing first and then composing through the viewfinder.... right?
