Nikon F w/ WLF?

[wjlapier]

How easy is it to focus with a WLF on a Nikon F camera? I like shooting TLRs and cameras with a WLF, and thought about maybe using a WLF on a Nikon F. Can you really see the split image GG from the waist or do you have to get it close to your eye?

 

[narsuitus]

I like shooting waist level finders on Mamiya TLR and Mamiya SLR medium format cameras.

Since I need to attach my Nikon F cameras to microscopes and telescopes, a waist level finder has been very useful to me. Attached is my Nikon F4 with a DW-20 waist-level finder replacing the eye-level finder. For me, focusing with the Nikon waist-level finder and shooting portrait orientation are not as easy with the Nikon compared to my medium format cameras.

For critical focusing, I prefer the Nikon DW-2 6x Magnifier Finder as seen on my F2.


Nikon waist-level finder on F4 by Narsuitus, on Flickr


Nikon DW-2 6x Magnifier Finder on F2 by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[Sirius Glass]

I used WLF for many years because that was all that was available on the cameras I had. WLFs are wonderful for allowing light from coming in from the side to put glare and reflections on the ground class allow dust on the ground glass. Plus they provide a left-right reversal.

 

[reddesert]

It's not really a waist level finder. It's more of a chest level finder. This is especially true with 35mm since the ground glass is a lot smaller than on a 6x6 camera. You would probably find yourself bringing it close to your eye and using the flip up magnifier a lot. With the Nikon F, try taking off the prism and making a makeshift hood out of cardboard or matboard to see how you get along with the size of the ground glass image, before investing in a WLF. (WLF hoods for SLRs both 35mm and medium format used to be relatively inexpensive, but for whatever reason over the past several years they have gotten pricey.)

 

[bdial]

The WLF on an F isn't all that easy to use, even when I was in my 20's I couldn't use it very effectively positioned at my waist, because of the small image size, as others have mentioned. The chimney finder style finder like the DW-2 works much better, but it's really an eye-level finder that you look down into. I don't know if the DW-2 can fit an F or not. I have the later version that is for an F3 though I don't use it very often.

 

[Paul Howell]

When I bought my used F the sales person tossed in WLF to sweeten the deal. My thinking at the time was to used to hold the camera over my head upside down to shoot over crowds with the motor drive, good theory, in practice found it really hard to focus, and I'm short, really hard to keep the body high enough to be useful, just learned to muscle my way to the front of the crowd. I have a WL and critical focus finder for Miranda EE and Sensormate, the critical finder is more useful when shooting with a bellows.

 

[RLangham]

On F2, you can’t see the split image well at waist level. I don’t see the point of a WLF on 35mm to be honest. There’s a better option for almost any use case: chimneys for the critical focusing and angle of viewing, right angle finder for the critical focusing, sport finder for the speed and eye relief, pentaprism for general use...

If you’re trying to shoot discreetly on the street you’re gonna find it frustrating and if not, just use the chimney instead—it offers more magnification and there’s nowhere for light to get in and make the image dim.

 

[ic-racer]

I used WLF for many years because that was all that was available on the cameras I had. WLFs are wonderful for allowing light from coming in from the side to put glare and reflections on the ground class allow dust on the ground glass. Plus they provide a left-right reversal.

You forgot to mention an additional feature. From waist level everything looks in focus, almost as good as a rangefinder viewfinder.

 

[RLangham]

You forgot to mention an additional feature. From waist level everything looks in focus, almost as good as a rangefinder viewfinder.

I fail to see why that would be desirable in most cases.

 

[narsuitus]

I fail to see why that would be desirable in most cases.

The only time I find that desirable is when I am zone focusing or shooting at hyperfocal. In those two situations, critical focus is not needed; therefore, I can just concentrate on framing and composition with a viewfinder image that makes everything look in focus.

 

[ic-racer]

I fail to see why that would be desirable in most cases.

No one understood Sirius Glass' sarcasm?

 

[Huss]

How easy is it to focus with a WLF on a Nikon F camera? I like shooting TLRs and cameras with a WLF, and thought about maybe using a WLF on a Nikon F. Can you really see the split image GG from the waist or do you have to get it close to your eye?

You have to get it close to your eye.

 

[RLangham]

No one understood Sirius Glass' sarcasm?

I went back and forth... in the end it just wasn't THAT outrageous enough of a statement for me to decide it was sarcasm.

 

[beemermark]

I have to use the built-in magnifying lens to focus and then hold it chest high to frame. I do wear progressive glasses to that may factor into it. I use mine for macro work with a tripod. Not much good for anything else IMHO.

 

[RLangham]

I have to use the built-in magnifying lens to focus and then hold it chest high to frame. I do wear progressive glasses to that may factor into it. I use mine for macro work with a tripod. Not much good for anything else IMHO.

Yeah, that’s about right. Compare that to how a MF WLF is actually moderately usable at waist level for a person with decent eyesight.

 

[Sirius Glass]

If WLFs on 35mm SLRs then there would be more cameras with them. Since there are no 35mm SLRs that are sold with WLF, one can easily figure out the WLFs are WOMBATs.

WOMBAT = Waste Of Money Brains And Time

 

[Huss]

If WLFs on 35mm SLRs then there would be more cameras with them. Since there are no 35mm SLRs that are sold with WLF, one can easily figure out the WLFs are WOMBATs.

WOMBAT = Waste Of Money Brains And Time

Not if you want to place the camera extremely close to, or on the ground, to take a photo. You can compose and create images with a WLF on a 35mm SLR that you wouldn't be able to otherwise.

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

I'll shoot around with a Bolsey 35mm TLR with a monopod for a change of pace. Good for scale focusing, but you can slow down and get critical focus via the ground glass + magnifier if you really want. No issues seeing the ground glass image, but YMMV.

 

[GRHazelton]

I have my Father's AsahiFlex IIa, a lovely little 35mm SLR with a waist level finder. IMHO a WL is fine for leisurely horizontal format shooting, but for any sort of action not so good! The VF image is reversed right to left, for this reason Asahi furnished a small 50 mm format finder beside the WL finder. Vertical shooting with a WL is really a trial, not only is the image reversed left to right but is is upside down! IMO the view screen on a 35mm SLR far too small for waist level shooting as one does easily with a 6 x 6 TLR or SLR.

 

[Paul Howell]

If you really want a 35mm with WLF how a Bolsey model C with duel focusing, WL and rangefinder. Never owned one, but collectors say it take a pretty good picture.

 

[RLangham]

If you really want a 35mm with WLF how a Bolsey model C with duel focusing, WL and rangefinder. Never owned one, but collectors say it take a pretty good picture.

I recall that it puts rounded corners on every frame!

 

[Sirius Glass]

If WLFs on 35mm SLRs then there would be more cameras with them. Since there are no 35mm SLRs that are sold with WLF, one can easily figure out the WLFs are WOMBATs.

WOMBAT = Waste Of Money Brains And Time

I have my Father's AsahiFlex IIa, a lovely little 35mm SLR with a waist level finder. IMHO a WL is fine for leisurely horizontal format shooting, but for any sort of action not so good! The VF image is reversed right to left, for this reason Asahi furnished a small 50 mm format finder beside the WL finder. Vertical shooting with a WL is really a trial, not only is the image reversed left to right but is is upside down! IMO the view screen on a 35mm SLR far too small for waist level shooting as one does easily with a 6 x 6 TLR or SLR.

Your observation matches my experience, hence my comments. The WLF is of minimal use.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Not if you want to place the camera extremely close to, or on the ground, to take a photo. You can compose and create images with a WLF on a 35mm SLR that you wouldn't be able to otherwise.

Some cameras have an 90 degree attachments for the prism that covers that situation. That provides what you want without the reflections and light bouncing around the WLF.

 

[Huss]

Some cameras have an 90 degree attachments for the prism that covers that situation. That provides what you want without the reflections and light bouncing around the WLF.

That's fine that that is offered. But people can make their choices as to what they want to use. Some may prefer a clip on attachment, others may prefer the WLF.
Interestingly, Sover Wong the Nikon F/F2 guru, has mentioned NOT to use a clip on attachment as it very easily damages the prism.

 

[Stats]

I use my waist level finder quite often,especially when shooting with the PC 28mm or PC 35mm lenses. It also opens up new point of views, specifically those "worm's eye views" from ground level.