Cameras & Glasses

[tjaded]

Just curious about those shooters out there that wear glasses--do you prefer to leave your glasses on or opt for a diopter? I've got so many cameras that getting a diopter for all of them is impractical to say the least...but I was dabbling with the idea of getting one for my Nikon F. If I did my homework correctly, it seems that I have to choose either a -2.0 or a -3.0 since they only did them in whole numbers--which way would you go? My "shooting eye" is right in the middle at -2.5!

 

[Ian David]

My shooting eye is currently about -3.0. I just wear my glasses with all my cameras. Slightly annoying at times, but cheaper than keeping my various cameras in sync with changing eyesight!

Ian

 

[Christopher Walrath]

The only time I sherk the specs is when I am using either a spot meter or a grain focuser. My eye has to be right on top of them. Aside from that, old four eyes it is.

 

[pinhole_dreamer]

I just went out and got contacts. I can actually ACCURATELY focus now. *sigh*

 

[Mark_S]

I have a bad astigmatism (4 diopters of astigmatism), so glasses are my only option. Rubber eye cups are a big help...

 

[Klainmeister]

The first time I shot a manual SLR camera I took my glasses off because they were bugging me. Needless to say, my trip to Mexico was blurry in more than one respect.

I just throw in contacts if I know I'll be out shooting, if not, then glasses it is. Can't justify the cost otherwise. I feel nerdy wearing my gators I must admit, though....

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

My camera (EOS 1N with right-angle finder) is 'tuned' to correct my eyesight — I cannot quote the deficiency of my head but it is significant and I need reading glasses full time. All my focusing is accurate and sharp. Plenty of photographers do where glasses with a rubberised eyepiece to protect from damage. I'm happy with my set up. I use my spot meter unaided (it has satisfactory dioptric correction of the eyepiece). Glasses are off for eyeballing trannies with loupé on lightbox; to compensate the loupé is lifted to that point where clear vision of detail is available. No problems.

 

[Vaughn]

I am near-sighted -- about -6.26 or so. Since I use LF, I just take off my glasses and I can focus as well as most normal vision people who use a loupe.

Any other kind of camera/grain focuser I keep my glasses on.

 

[Wade D]

I'm near sighted and need my glasses on to focus correctly with all but LF where I use a loupe. On 35mm I can't see the entire frame but over the years have become very good at judging framing by scanning the corners.

 

[DanT]

I wear glasses as well but so far haven't had too much trouble. Might be a reason to try contacts, but as long as I'm careful when composing a shot I don't really run into any problems.

 

[DWThomas]

I'm near-sighted and have noticeable astigmatism (and presbyopia {sp?}). I just wear my glasses (progressive bifocals) and it's OK for most things. A few oldies, like my Argus C3 and my folders are a little hard to scrunch up against to get the full field of view, but I adapt. Hmm -- maybe that's why I like WLFs!

 

[Bob-D659]

I wear bifocals and am near sighted and astigmatism, so I made +1.25 diopters from dollar store reading glasses to correct the top part of the glasses so the viewfinder is in perfect focus.

 

[Steve Smith]

I am near-sighted -- about -6.26 or so. Since I use LF, I just take off my glasses and I can focus as well as most normal vision people who use a loupe.

Any other kind of camera/grain focuser I keep my glasses on.

I'm the same.


Steve.

 

[lxdude]

I am near-sighted -- about -6.26 or so. Since I use LF, I just take off my glasses and I can focus as well as most normal vision people who use a loupe.

Any other kind of camera/grain focuser I keep my glasses on.

Wow. I'm around a 4 or 4.5, and I thought that was a lot. When I was younger, I could focus almost right up to the corneal surface. Not any more, sorry to say.
Diopters always gave the best view, but for field work, impractical. My glasses would get smudges if I put them on my forehead to look through the finder, along with getting scratches from the flash shoe. I got glasses with flex joints in the earpieces, and would cram my face as close as I can. Works well enough. Getting an F3HP eliminated the problem.
One reason I went later with Pentax was that the LX is nearly as good as the F3HP regarding eye relief, not quite, as it has a larger image magnification, but darn close, and the other cameras like the MX and ME Super are for me, much better with glasses than the Nikon FM series.

 

[werra]

Yeah, I wear -5.5, keep them all the time with 35mm slr, critical focus on mf wlf and lf is done without. No loupe needed

 

[benjiboy]

I have Astigmatism and wear varifocal glasses I don't have any problems with my cameras as long as I'm careful to look through the top portion of the lenses when I focus.

 

[tjaded]

The only time I really have trouble is with 35mm...but I am also a left eye shooter with a big nose. I should probably get a right angle viewer instead! HA HA.

 

[MattKing]

The only time I really have trouble is with 35mm...but I am also a left eye shooter with a big nose. I should probably get a right angle viewer instead! HA HA.

Hey, another left eyed shooter with a big nose named Matt - could we be related ?

 

[Galah]

Just curious about those shooters out there that wear glasses--do you prefer to leave your glasses on or opt for a diopter? ...!

For many of my shots, I use hyperfocal distance focusing and only look through the viewfinder for framing. I then often leave my glasses off.

For close-up shots, I just focus through my glasses (varifocals).

 

[tkamiya]

I am near sighted AND far sighted. I'm doomed.

 

[ic-racer]

One reason I like the Rollei 35mm cameras is the adjustable diopter. I perfer to shoot without my glasses. Also, on 8x10 I take my glasses off, or look around them; since I'm nearsighted, I don't need a loupe.

I also modified one of my SL35M Rollei cameras (without the adjustable diopter) by using a Contax brand dioper I go off e-bay.

 

[tjaded]

So...am I the only glasses wearer to consider making my next pair of glasses out of an old pair of large format lenses?


Just kidding...I think...

 

[Steve Smith]

I was playing around with my Zorki 4 last weekend and wondered why the viewfinder was sometimes blurred and at other times, sharp. Later on I wondered what the little lever next to the rewind was and only found out by looking in the manual that it was the viewfinder focus adjustment!


Steve.

 

[bdial]

So...am I the only glasses wearer to consider making my next pair of glasses out of an old pair of large format lenses?

That could be very cool, in a steam-punk kind of way.

The glasses I want would have lenses with continually variable indices of refraction, so that I wouldn't have to deal with part of the lens that's good for close work (and never close enough) and part of it good for distance. The lens could just adjust to the requirement.

I know such stuff exists in research labs, but no one's doing it yet with a marketable product so far as I know.

As to the original topic, like most here, I just wear my glasses when using the camera, with the occasional exception of removing them to look at a LF GG.

 

[Dave in Kansas]

I have begun removing my glasses after focusing, to better see the entire frame. With my glasses on I can't easily see the full viewfinder and too often end up with less than ideal framing.

I always thought it would be interesting if glasses had round lenses that were threaded so on a hazy day you could screw in a couple of haze filters, and maybe a couple K2 or orange G filters on a foggy day. It would be real convenient if your glasses took the same size filters as your camera.

Dave