Lee, there is no feedback whatever on the patch sizes as I was hoping here or elsewhere. I was thinking maybe the R3-4 series might have a larger patch and with incorporate metering that would work for me. Thanks btw for that link. That is something I could use.
OK, I thought of one 'measure' that might help. On my R3A the rangefinder patch is very close to 1/5 the height and 1/5 the width of the 90mm framelines. Of course framelines vary from model to model in % coverage relative to the actual lens, but I guess this is better than nothing.
The M5 (3 Lug) and the CLE both have 28mm framelines. They're the two cameras I use the most.
The Voigtlander R4A/M models have viewfinders specially set up for wide angle lenses. If you don't want longer focal lengths than 50mm then they're probably your best option. The occasional use of a longer focal length can be handled with a supplementary viewfinder, also from Voigtlander (Cameraquest).
As for the rangefinder base length issue, it could be argued that it affects long focal length lenses (most people can't see the difference) but is not apparent at closer range.
I use an R3A and the 1:1 viewfinder in that case is just brilliant. I got a +1 diopter lens for the viewfinder to help my old eyes and am more than satisfied.
I'm new to this forum. Is it usual for people to attach religious messages to their posts? For what purpose? :(
Originally Posted by waynecrider
Originally Posted by waynecrider
Maybe 35mm rf isn't the place to look. Maybe 120mm format like a Mamiya 7 II or if you really want a nice big focusing image try 7"x17". You won't do much street photography, but if you want wide, "with the possibility of (big maybe) getting a 28mm, " we got wide.
The 3 LUG M5 bodies have 28mm viewfinders as well as 50mm. That'd be my recomendation. You can pick up a used one for a good price.
With respect to the original post, one thought that comes to mind is that if a diopter is connected to the M3's viewfinder lens, and all becomes clear with it, then viewing without glasses may become a problem when the eye is taken away from the viewfinder window ... or so it was with me. I put a protective ring (made from black vinyl electrical tape) around the metal collar of my M3's viewfinder lens so that I can use glasses without scratching them. Now I can see the scene, dials, and scales all clearly when taking the eye away from the finder. I suppose that contact lenses would solve it all, but I just don't want to wear them. With my Kiev 4a I have done the same, but its finder is but a wee little peep hole. I use a Voigtlander Kontur finder with it. Takes a bit of getting used to, but it works pretty well with glasses.
In the spirit of our purpose, we probably should try not to do that. But then again, some do seem to talk as though they believe in the devine origins of Lords Leica, Linhof, and Hasselblad. I, for one, have learned to trust Nikon, regarding 40 years of trouble free service as somehow a miracle. And then there are the Saints people talk about: Saint Ansel, Saint Henri, and so on. Personally, I believe that the F2 is the reincarnation of the F, having ascended from a factory somewhere near Tokyo. Right now, I am thinking that adding a new D700 would be just heavenly, and the answer to my prayers. I understand that my majestic old Nikkors can be used with it. That would breathe the breath of new life into my classic F mount optics. But be assured, I have no conviction with respect to a wholesale conversion to digital.
Originally Posted by Leigh Youdale
Kidding aside, I think we should not have a thought police which precludes people from adding value here by speaking their minds truthfully. On the other hand, and as far as practical, we should abstain from using this PHOTOGRAPHY FORUM as a platform for propagating and/or debating non-photographically related subjects and issues.
A certified dinosaur using F, F2, M3 & K4a
Getting my cataracts done made the most difference but putting a 1+ diopter lens in the viewfinders of both my Nikkormat FTn and my Bessa R3A also helped greatly and pretty well overcame the issue of wearing glasses while using either camera. I'd had to stop using the SLR until my eyes were fixed as I couldn't get clear focus.
As for the "other", nicely put. :-) However, as a practicing atheist I don't think I'll burden the forum members with my thoughts, even if others choose to do so. The real issue might be contained in part of your reply - "adding value" ???????
The only RFs I use these days are Zorkis and old old Retinas. Since I am always down in the f11-f16 range, perhaps the issue of patch size and sharpness has never come up in my old eyes.
As far as Wayne and his tags, he is an important part of the forum, been here about forever and has never actively recruited me nor any one else that I know of. So live and let live.
As far as being an atheist, I don't have to even practice anymore. Someday you will get there too. I don't see Wayne's tags as any different than my somewhat zen like tag that often appears at the bottom of my posts.
And remember, there are three kinds of engineers in the world, those who can count, and those who can't.
tim in san jose