Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/07/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi Ken. This can be a little tricky, especially since the magnifiers and correction eyepieces are expensive accessories. Firstly though it is possible that your Tele Elmarit 90 could benefit from adjustment to the M8/M9 standard at Solms (or NJ I guess) Tolerances are much higher and error that might be un-noticeable on film or inconsequential can be more visible with sensors (and pixel peeking at high magnifications on your monitor). If it has not been serviced within recent years you may consider a CLA? Some careful, controlled testing will tell you the story anyway. When you use your M9 normally, do you wear spectacles? I guess that you know that the finder has built-in minus half a dioptre? This has the effect of giving you a virtual image two metres in front of the finder. Our eyes are generally comfortable focusing a little to use that. Or we need further correction (eyepieces and/or spectacles) of course which is based on your distance correction numbers (for spectacles). You may want to visit your friendly optometrist/opthamologist first and try your camera with the temporary test lenses. You might find that a correction lens will really 'pop' that finder image into clarity for you. The 1.25x and 1.4x magnifiers make the image larger rather than change that virtual distance. So they are meant to make it easier to detect differences in the alignment of the two images at the rangefinder patch (and also make the frame lines larger of course). Anecdotally the magnifiers also include some further dioptre correction, alhough this is not documented anywhere that I can see. So the executive summary is that the best course is to look through a magnifier with any extra correction you may use (eyepiece and/or glasses) on your camera with your eyeball ;-). I actually have both, having got them used at more reasonable prices. The magnification is at the cost of some eye relief, a little contrast and luminance, as well as field of view of course. This is more so with the 1.4x. That one protrudes further and gives more of a tunnel vision effect, inevitably. My view is that the 1.25x is a better choice/compromise. It works well for me with 75 and up. I never use my 1.4x now in practice. Both do allow me more precise focus with the longer lenses if I have my camera on a tripod and am working at a critical setup (wide open, in close). By more precise focus I mean I can see tiny alignment errors at the rangefinder patch that I don't see with my unaided eye. http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/128264662 http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/130983354 Depending on just what you are shooting, the anglefinder actually offers by far the clearest, sharpest (higher magnified) image of all (of the central 8 or 9 mm of the finder). It is not at all suitable for general photography though. http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/124448398 Cheers Geoff *Life's not black and white, except at both ends* http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman On 4 July 2011 06:46, Kenneth Frazier <kennybod at mac.com> wrote: > Folks, > > I know some on the list have used the 1.4x magnifier. I think I recall > seeing a post somewhere by Hoppy about it. > > Have any of you used it with longer lenses (75 or 90), and if so, what's > your opinion? > > I want to be able to use my T-E 90 on my M9, but it's really fiddly on the > focus. > > So, I'm considering the "new" CV 75/1.8 as an alternative to the 90. > > Thoughts, opinions, experience? > > TIA, > > Ken > -------------------------- > Kenneth Frazier > kennybod at me.com > kennybod at mac.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >