Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/02/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]What do you disagree with? The 28 frame in the .72 does not go to the edge of the viewfinder. According to my pictures, and the 24 external viewfinder, the 24, in fact, does completely fill the viewfinder (if you can see to the extents of the viewfinder, that is), for the most part. I can't vouch for it being to within .00000001 degree of accuracy, but it is as accurate for the 24 as the 28 frame lines are for the 28, with the exception of parallax. But, you don't get any parallax correction with the external viewfinder anyway... If the reason you can't see to the edges of the viewfinder is because you wear glasses, than that doesn't make anything I said wrong...does it? - ---------- From: Nathan Wajsman Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2000 1:27 AM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] 21mm vs. 24mm I really disagree with this statement. Now, it has to be said that since I wear glasses. I have the 24mm, and there is no way I can see the full frame without the finder. If you buy a 24mm lens, it is presumably with the goal of getting more stuff into the frame; so the things that are around the edges of the image are of utmost importance. If you cannot see them when taking the picture, you might as well use a 28mm! Nathan Austin Franklin wrote: > With the .72, you don't need a viewfinder for the 24. That's why I chose the 24 over the 21... - -- Nathan Wajsman Overijse, Belgium and Zurich, Switzerland e-mail: wajsman@webshuttle.ch General photo page: http://members.tripod.com/belgiangator Belgium photo page: http://members.xoom.com/wajsman