Leica produces a 1.25 magnifier for M cameras, why not a right angled finder to the same fitting. They made an angle finder for early LTM Leicas. It is difficult to use the Leica at low level without loss of dignity. I appreciate dignity is for idiots, but I sometimes end up rolling around & getting dirty, and am in more or less portly middle age, so getting up can be a problem.

I have tried a Pentax angle finder. It corrects for individual eyesight and focusses the rangefinder accurately, but the fitting does not fit closely to the eyepiece so I get vignetting,

so I ask, what do you reckon?

-- James Elwing (elgur@acay.com.au), May 30, 2002

Answers

I reckon there isn't enough of a market to justify the expense. You know Leica, they can't do ANYTHING cheap!

-- Alec (alecj@bellsouth.net), May 30, 2002.

Leica priorities for the use of their scarse resources?

It would probably cost $3-400, if the price of the 1.25x is any guide. I can't believe that they'd really sell that many anyway (of course, I could be wrong). It would be cheaper to adapt one from CV or another older RF maker.

The 1.25x is actually a nice compromise for users of longer focal length lenses on less-than-ideal bodies. In many ways, and for people who only rarely use 90 or 135, it nullifies the need to buy a .85 body.

-- Skip Williams (skipwilliams@pobox.com), May 30, 2002.

Voigtlander/Cosina makes a version for wide-angles. Go here and scroll down to the middle of the page.

Unfortunately you have to put your eye right up to the finder - so it doesn't help much with the 'dignity factor'.

I'd love a waist-level finder - with at least a foot of 'eye-relief'. Leica made these, but only for-near-normal focal lengths. When I'm shooting waist-level type pictures I usually use the 21, so I need one with the wide view.

Anyone want to go in on a research/development project? If we get an efficient design, maybe we can co-market it with either Lutz Konermann or Tom Abrahamsson. Maybe just a rear-eyepiece adapter for the Cosina version, that captures and enlarges the virtual iamge so that it's visible/usable from a foot away.

On the other hand, THIS was shot by just ESTIMATING framing (and focus at 16') with a 21.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), May 30, 2002.

Dooh! Focusing at 16 inches, not 16 feet - obviously!!

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), May 30, 2002.

Hey Andy! You gonna eat that fish, or what?

Neat shot!

Ben

-- Ben Hughes (ben@hughesbros.com), May 30, 2002.

Nice shot, Andy!

Thanks for the confidence, too. I actually built a waist level finder these days which cost me roughly $10. Now you're curious, aren't you...?;o)

All it took me was to find a so called "Brilliantsucher" taken from a beater 6x9 Agfa vintage bellows camera and to build a housing in order to attach it to the hot shoe. It gives me an angle of view of a 40mm, roughly, sides flipped, but you can get easily used to it. At such a low price a nice toy for special purposes. Pix anybody? Cheers.

-- Lutz Konermann (lutz@konermann.net), May 30, 2002.

I have one of the old Leitz WINTU right angle finders for the 50 on my screwmounts. Its actually for shooting around the corner rather than waist level. There's a mirror that lets you use the seprate rangefinder while doing so.It seemed like good idea when I bought it several months ago, but I haven't got around to actually using the thing.

-- Robert Marvin (marvbej@earthlink.net), May 30, 2002.

-- Lutz Konermann (lutz@konermann.net), June 01, 2002.

Thanks folks. If I get around to it I might try fitting my Pentax finder to my M3 and send you all on a few images

-- James Elwing (elgur@acay.com.au), June 04, 2002.