Godfrey
somewhat colored
I've had Flexon frames ... they're nice, but mine suffered too many breakages. I've been using Lindberg frames for the past eight years or so ... very thin acrylic frame with simple titanium arms that have a clever fold implementing the hinge. Only one pair has ever cracked (not broken) and Lindberg replaced them free of charge (and they were over three years old!). Best frames I've ever had: very light, very thin, sit close to the eye, dont get in the way, and flex nicely when needed.
G
Bad Example
Member
Interesting idea. I like that!
boojum
Mentor
Just be patient. When you get cataract surgery you can get corrected to nearly 20/20. I am 20/40 and 20/20 now. I wear glasses for the Photosun UV protection. Also, squinting through a minuscule hole to focus is just too difficult and retro for me. It's 2022 now and there are better focusing solutions. I squint with some cameras not because I enjoy the masochism but because I like the camera sensor. But each to their own taste.
Saganich
Established
I have given up on seeing all the 35mm frame lines simultaneously with glasses so I check the important ones independently and concentrate on what's in focus because if that misses nothing else matters anyway.
cboy
Well-known
Have you tried the Bresson viewfinder that fits the m11. Saw it in the bay Includes an eyecup
Haven't experienced myself however
Haven't experienced myself however
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
I know I might be stoned for this but some people paint a thin layer of liquid black electrical tape around the eye piece.
I use wear glasses and use 35mm frame lines regularly. My guess is the glass of your glasses is far away from your eye?
Dogman
Mentor
I did this with my Kiev when I was using it. It was designed to chew up eyeglasses in two seconds of use.
das
Well-known
I guess. But even without glasses, the 35mm hugs the way outside of the frame, making it difficult for me to frame. I really like the Hexar RF for 35mm or even a Bessa R4 because it was easy to see what was in and what was going on outside of the frame. Or even an M3 with goggles is better than a .72x mag imho. I like actually putting a goggled Summaron on a .72 VF.
Out to Lunch
Menteur
I use the Voigtlander 15-35mm Multi Format Zoomfinder -Type A. All frame lines are clearly visible. Type A incorporates frame lines for full-frame sensors, 1.3x-crop APS-H sensors, and 1.5x-crop APS-C sensors. It has a built-in diopter (-2.8 to +1.3) and has click-stop settings for 15, 21, 25, 28, and 35mm focal lengths. Cheers, OtL
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
This is not an issue at all when using a 50mm lens or longer, but when shooing a 35 or 28 you get used to focusing and then glancing in corners of the RF when framing. No big deal. My glasses don't even touch the diopter. Besides, the RF diopter is made of plastic and will not generally hurt your glasses.
There's always live-view or accessory finders too.
Agree 100%. I've always had the same trouble you describe, and bought a goggled 35 Summaron for my M2 as a good solution to that, as well as my two Hexar RFs and the R4!
dmr
Registered Abuser
I just made a couple of correcting eyecups using cheap generic camera-show eyecups and cheap plastic lenses which come close to my prescription.
Herr Barnack
Newbie
I have photographed with glasses and M cameras since 2003 - it is a little inconvenient, but it's really not that big of a deal - for me, at least. I have never had my M camera scratch my glasses lens, either. I just get as close to the camera's eyepiece as I can and photograph with the right lens of my glasses pressed on the eyepiece.
I simply do not trust laser eye surgery. Yes, it has been going on for decades and the majority of people have good outcomes - but there are still some botched results, which cannot be salvaged. I'm just not willing to throw that pair of dice.
I asked my eye doctor in terms of accurate focusing, do glasses or contacts give a photographer a better result? "Glasses," she said. So glasses it is.
I simply do not trust laser eye surgery. Yes, it has been going on for decades and the majority of people have good outcomes - but there are still some botched results, which cannot be salvaged. I'm just not willing to throw that pair of dice.
I asked my eye doctor in terms of accurate focusing, do glasses or contacts give a photographer a better result? "Glasses," she said. So glasses it is.
The_Film_Fellow
Member
Hi, for me personally it really helped to start wearing contact lenses.
Hope that helps.
Hope that helps.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
But then you have to wear reading glasses to see your camera settings!
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I've been putting corrective lenses on my Leicas. In this way I can see the finder image perfectly, and can also shift my eye to see the camera settings, mostly the shutter speed, without fiddling with eyeglasses. My prescription is mild enough at minus 2.75 that I can still my subjects well enough without putting my glasses on. Of course, at times when I need to, I can put them back on. When out photographing I hand my glasses around my neck with the "Croakie" cord so they are right there if needed.
Actually there is an advantage to looking over the subject without wearing corrective lenses. R. Buckminster Fuller, the inventor of the geodesic dome, wrote that his having been born with very out-of-focus vision trained him to see large patterns, more so than being drawn into details. I find it can actually be a help, sometimes, not always, to aid composition and balance. When it's better to be aware of the details, I put my glasses on.
Actually there is an advantage to looking over the subject without wearing corrective lenses. R. Buckminster Fuller, the inventor of the geodesic dome, wrote that his having been born with very out-of-focus vision trained him to see large patterns, more so than being drawn into details. I find it can actually be a help, sometimes, not always, to aid composition and balance. When it's better to be aware of the details, I put my glasses on.
Richard G
Mentor
The M11 is digital. I have totally relaxed in my glasses and only used the 28 Zeiss finder on the M9-P once when I first got a 28. I reckon I would now do the same with film also. I can just squeeze in the 35mm frames of my M2 and no way the 28 in the digitals. But I sort of just know now what I'll get with the 28, which I use a lot. Taught myself Right eye shooting 20 years ago when I first got a 35. Easy since then.
Yokosuka_Mike
Abstract Clarity
Tell me more!
Out to Lunch
Menteur
I had a look on YouTube but it doesn't feature there. This link shows the finder and provides the tech specs: Voigtlander 15-35mm Multi Format Zoomfinder (Type A) Cheers, OtL