Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,929   Posts: 1,585,249   Online: 984
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Aquitaine
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,913
    I use mine all the time for copying. Of course 'waist level' is not too accurate: 'chest level' would be more like it.

    Cheers,

    Roger

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,565
    Images
    91
    I had a WLF, which I rarely used,for my long departed Nikon F. I have an F3 now, but no WLF. However, I do find it handy on the F models to remove the prism finder occasionally for low angle work. But, just for one or two shots remounting a WLF doesn't seem quite worth it. As others have said, they are handy for copy work or tabletop close ups where the camera is well below your standing eye level.
    If you are used to a prism and not used to a WLF, switching back and forth would be challenge.

  3. #13
    Daniel_OB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Mississauga, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    420
    I can cast an old phoptograph on the scanner and let the machine to do all. Or I can use WLF with micro lens and start determining all by myself, "hand made" reproduction, it is feeling I am making something, and it is nice feeling. The same is in many other cases. I can live without WLF on my F3, but I will loose a lot in my heart. I just use it because I like it, it make me to to turn head back in the time when I used even and enlarger to make some reproductions. To me, WLF is just nice to have, not a must.

    www.Leica-R.com

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Italia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,680
    I love a WF on a MF camera. On a tripod or handheld. I only use other kinds of finders when the WF wouldn't work. The big WF is a joy to use.

    OTOH with 35mm I'm not sure it would be big enough for me.

  5. #15
    jstraw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Topeka, Kansas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,703
    Images
    42
    I had a similar finder back when I used Canon F-1 gear. I loved it.
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. In velit arcu, consequat at, interdum sit amet, consequat in, quam.

  6. #16
    DBP
    DBP is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,886
    Images
    34
    It's very useful for low level shots, or other positions where getting behind the camera is not feasible. I also chatted once with a fellow who had used the one on his Nikon F to take pictures of the President from the back of a crowd by shooting with the camera upside down. I have done the same with a TLR at weddings.

    I also find I compose better with one, maybe it's a function of using both eyes.

  7. #17
    Mick Fagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,849
    Images
    29
    I have the DW-3 WLF as well as the DW-4 (6 times magnification) full screen micro finder.

    I find the WLF is very useful for photographing a room with the camera back, up against a wall.

    It is terrific for close focusing in the field, as the pop-up magnifying glass allows extremely accurate focusing.

    In a crowd you can pop the WLF on, hold the camera above your head upside down, so to speak, and compose the picture then shoot. This works very well with a 24mm or wider lens attached, where focus isn't that critical. The pop up walls stop light falling onto the focusing screen allowing you to compose, At times I have just pulled the finder off, but with the WLF on, you can see the screen so much better.

    For copy work they are quite good, although the DW-4 is better.

    The WLF is the only accessory I always carry, apart from lenses.

    Mick.

  8. #18
    Bandicoot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Eastern England
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    201
    I use a WLF a lot with Medium Format, but with 35mm the ground glass screen is that much smaller so some of the attraction of the WLF is lost for me. However, I have one for my Pentax LX bodies and do use it, either for work with people when the camera is on a tripod and I want to maintain eye contact, or as a lightweight alternative for low level shooting.

    I don't use it for copy work - because the Pentax magnifying finder is better for that job, as it is also for low angle work or when angling a big lens upwards. I don't use it as my low angle solution either, if I don't mind the greater weight and bulk of the action finder instead. However, all these cases are only because the LX gives me another finder option that is even better than using the WLF, but if that was all I had (in addition to a pentaprism, that is) then certainly I would use it for those things too.

    No, it isn't an essential, but it is a useful thing, and you may find that you really like working with one.



    Peter

  9. #19
    jstraw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Topeka, Kansas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,703
    Images
    42
    I'm not familiar with Nikon's WLF but Canon's was the size of the entire GG and magnified. It felt huge.
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. In velit arcu, consequat at, interdum sit amet, consequat in, quam.

  10. #20
    AgX
    AgX is online now

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,091
    I would like to draw your attention to the term waist level finder in its actual meaning (Roger, of course you may hold your camera a bit higher…), as this has only been scarcely hinted at here:
    I remember literature from the sixties where that perspective issue was marked as something differenciating 35mm SLRs from the MF TLRs.
    Is that different perspective (in general photography) an issue to you?

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin