RE: [Leica] Viewfinders

[Greg.Chappell@bankofamerica.com]

All this recent talk about view vs. reality on film with wide lenses & their
finders got me to thinking. Here's what I'm going to do to see what the
difference is.

I have a 21 Elmarit. I'm going to mount the camera on a tripod with the back
door open. Open & lock the shutter. Then use a Nikon "B" screen to view the
image at the film plane while comparing the view through the 21 finder.
Since the view through the film gate is 100%, you should be able to
determine what your error is in viewing through the finder.

It'd be interesting to know what the difference is with these new 15mm
lenses.

Greg

- -----Original Message-----
From: Henning J. Wulff [mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2000 2:10 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: [Leica] Viewfinders


Recently someone mentioned that the Heliar viewfinder shows 83%. I don't
know where this number came from, but I assume this is either the linear or
areal percentage of the image recorded on film.

Unless the finder has been changed since I got mine about a year ago, I
have to disagree. Mine shows essentially 100%, or as close as any optical
finder with some distortion and somewhat undetermined eye location can. I
checked it by comparing the view with that seen through the viewfinder of a
Nikon F series camera with the Nikon 15, which lens is probably close
enough in actual focal length to the Heliar as to make no difference. The
finder for the old 15/8 Leica Hologon also shows 100%, or very close to it.
On the other hand, the 16mm Contax finder, though it has that nice bubble
level, shows almost exactly the same as the 20mm Nikkor, so it makes a
reasonable finder for the 21 M lenses. It's rather bulky though, and I
needed to do a bit of Dremel work to get it to sit in the shoe properly.
The price is not much different than that of the Cosina finders, I believe.

The finders for M camera have always been an aggravation, from their cost,
their tendency to break off or fall off and break to the need to shift your
eye from one hole to the other. In spite of the generally nasty comments
about the present Leica finders, I find them better in use than the older
metal ones or those from other manufacturer's. The 16 Contax finder is, as
noted, rather bulky and not too accurate, as is the 21 Contax. Possibly the
21 Contax finder would show the correct view for the 24; I don't have one
to check. Both these finder slide out of the Leica shoe too easily as well.
The Cosina finders are a lot smaller, but still sit higher than the Leica
finders and fit better, but their 'aerodynamic' shape makes them a bit hard
to handle, and can slip out of your hand at times. The old metal Leica
finders slipped out of the shoe a lot easier than the new ones, and I
wrecked a number of them by knocking them off the camera and onto the
ground. The metal transmits that shock to the glass, and that's the end of
the glass. Over the years I've spent considerably more on finders than the
cost of the 21 SA, even though for about 15 years I had the finders on a
tether. I've still got two slightly cracked finders lying around here. The
new finders don't slide out easily, can absorb some shock, are low profile,
bright, as low distortion as any and show you what you will get as well as
any. The only thing they need is an easily replaceable foot. I don't mind
that it breaks off if you whack it (rather the foot than the top plate of
the camera), but you should be able to fix it more easily. AND it should be
priced a lot lower      ....yeah, like we'll see that!

   *            Henning J. Wulff
  /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
 /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
 |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com