Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/15

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Canon 135/3.5 lens
From: rangefinder at (Didier Ludwig)
Date: Wed Sep 15 08:34:42 2004
References: <003101c49a89$936826d0$357e5142@leirex> <r02010300-1035-0CFAADAB067E11D9869C000A957A8242@[]>


On the IIIf a 135 VF is a must, I guess. But even on a M6, I use a separate 
VF very often.  But as I already mentioned, the Canon 135 VF, at least the 
one I have, isn't very good.

The cheapest alternative is the russian turret finder (about $35 on 
e*ay)  which allows to see what's outside the 135-frame (what I appreciate 
very much), but this VF has some more parallax distance as it is higher 
than a 135-only VF. And whats great about this russian VF is the fact it 
shows cross-hairs in the middle of the frame, which is very helpful in many 

I would appreciate cross-hairs IN EVERY viewfinder, especially for 
wide-angles,  but that's another topic...


> > This info is what I have gathered
> > from
> > various users and collectors including my experience.
> >
> > Regards,
> > David
>Thanks, David.  Since I'm new to Leicas after 30+ yrs of Nikon, I wasn't
>sure about the "compatibility" of either the Canon or Nikon lenses with
>my IIIf.  And, I would think, as I am learning to "see" things
>differently through the RF viewfinder, it would be very helpful to have
>the 135 viewfinder.  Not so?

Replies: Reply from kennybod at (Kenneth Frazier) ([Leica] Canon 135/3.5 lens)
In reply to: Message from leirex at (SML) ([Leica] Canon 135/3.5 lens)
Message from kennybod at (Kenneth Frazier) ([Leica] Canon 135/3.5 lens)