I think the brightness and clarity of viewfinders is over estimated, especially for street photography. Two of the cameras I regularly use are a Zeiss Ikon Nettar and a digital Fuji X10 and both have notoriously 'poor' finders, but neither have distracting focus areas or other screen illumination and scales. An article once stated, only half jokingly, that early Leicas had such poor viewfinders only the best compositions showed themselves through it. I believe there's something in that. What's needed most for street work, is an instant appraisal of composition, not focus.
Yes. I don't expect my street photos to have a spot on sharp focus. What really makes it stands out is the composition with the help of the subject photographed character/style/shapes and the scene moment itself.
O often use a filter to add more softness to the image like these:
Attachment 73417 Attachment 73418
I think I read @blockend post too fast and I mixed up things.
But anyway. What I mean is that for street photos even if I miss a bit the focus it is fine.
But if will be grate if I find out I can have spot on focus without wearing my glasses.
I will develop the negative tomorrow and find out. :)
Just to finish this thread now that I have the results. Yes, it worked for me. Focusing without wearing glasses and use the split image in the viewfinder centre or even not looking into the viewfinder and using the distance as reference. Of courser I used a 28mm lens which makes it much easier and many of the shots the focus in not perfect but it is acceptable for street photography. :)
Seems like as good a thread as any to ask a question about diopters I never see discussed anywhere: I get the need for a diopter if you can't properly see at the effective distance that the viewfinder appears at. But does it change the apparent focus of the scene in the viewfinder, and/or the accuracy of the focusing aids? Let's say for instance that I know my eyes are no longer perfect with age, though they're pretty good. And when I look in my viewfinder, I can perfectly bring into focus the focusing screen, the metering needle, etc. But when something looks in focus on the screen, or the two halves of the split finder match, etc. is it definitely in focus, or is it off by the amount of error in my eyes? I guess my question is, am I looking a projected image on a surface, so it's a question of whether I can properly focus on that surface (I can)? Or is it like at the optometrist's office, where they put those lenses in front of your eyes, except in this case I'm using the camera lens to correct my vision, so the net result is I'm going to make focusing errors because my vision isn't perfect? I think it's the former, but I'm curious to know if anyone knows the answer for sure.
OK good. So until my eyes go bad in such a way that I can't see the viewfinder clearly, I don't have to worry that I'm mis-focusing everything. Whew!
In order to focus the image, you must be able to see the focussing screen clearly. That means a good quality loupe in the case of a view camera, and for a 35 it means the ability to focus your eyeball sharply on an object about 3 feet away - the apparent distance most viewfinder optical systems present to the viewer.