Leica First few photos with the M8.2 + Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4

usayit

Veteran
Sep 4, 2010
44
I can still see the same frame lines with the lens attached which I presume are the 24mm and 35mm lines you described. This confused me a little because I thought that the 35mm lens would be more of a 47mm lens. After reading your post above, my understanding is that the crop factor has been accounted for in the frame lines, is that right? So 35mm = 47mm?
Yup... what you are seeing is the 24 and 35mm frameline set. And that's an affirmative... the frame lines are already accounting for the crop factor.
 

Brian

Top Veteran
Jul 7, 2010
103
Framelines on a rangefinder give ~90% of the picture area, as a rule of thumb. They are not 100% accurate, and cannot be as most to not account for change in field of view of a lens as you focus it. The Leica framelines account for parallax, but the relative size of the frame does not change as you focus. The Konica S2 and Polaroid 180 are examples of rangefinder cameras where the size of the framelines change as you focus.

The M8 framelines are set for minimum focus, which suits me just fine. The 75mm framelines exactly match the FOV of my Nikkor 8.5cm f2 and the 90mm framelines are perfect for my Nikkor 10.5cm F2.5.
 

TraamisVOS

Hall of Famer
Nov 29, 2010
124
Melbourne, Australia
Traamis, have you got any experience of the Voigtlander 15mm f4.5 wide?
No but deidre does. The M8.2 and the 35mm is the first time I've ever held a Leica and/or Voigtlander lens before.


Yup... what you are seeing is the 24 and 35mm frameline set. And that's an affirmative... the frame lines are already accounting for the crop factor.
ah ok that makes sense. It's confusing, this crop factor. By the way I played around with the camera some more today, I'm sorry to say I think the framing composition problems I was having was me being a complete newbie and not used to the rangefinder viewfinder. :redface::redface::redface:


Framelines on a rangefinder give ~90% of the picture area, as a rule of thumb. They are not 100% accurate, and cannot be as most to not account for change in field of view of a lens as you focus it. The Leica framelines account for parallax, but the relative size of the frame does not change as you focus. The Konica S2 and Polaroid 180 are examples of rangefinder cameras where the size of the framelines change as you focus.

The M8 framelines are set for minimum focus, which suits me just fine. The 75mm framelines exactly match the FOV of my Nikkor 8.5cm f2 and the 90mm framelines are perfect for my Nikkor 10.5cm F2.5.
Thanks Brian, I'm very slowly understanding this. Rangefinder photography is very new to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

usayit

Veteran
Sep 4, 2010
44
Great! Learning and enjoying... that's all that matters.

My first rangefinder was an M3. I had to have the store demonstrate to me 3 times how to load film into it. Even ask them once why the rangefinder would intermittently disappear. I didn't realize I was holding it in such a way that my finger was covering the rangefinder window. Many people have forgotten to take off the lens cap. Very easy mistake on meterless rangefinders... I'm sure I'm not the only one. Oh and when I finally did get a digital rangefinder, the Epson R-D1. The rangefinder patch isn't in the middle of the frame. Boy did that get me a few times as I was visually using it as a "center" marker.

Have fun..
 

TraamisVOS

Hall of Famer
Nov 29, 2010
124
Melbourne, Australia
haha thanks usayit. I think what I was doing was focusing all my attention on the little patch in the middle of the viewfinder and forgetting to see the rest of the photo, or subconsciously confusing the frame lines and the viewfinder in its entirety. I'm still trying to work it out.

It's a little like tilt-shift lenses - however hard I try, I simply cannot work out how it makes everything look miniature. Psychologically, visually, technical physics, I just can't seem to work it out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

Latest threads

Top Bottom