Retina IIc viewfinder compared to M2 or R2A?

[Blooze]

I'm cross-posting this across a couple of forums in hopes of getting some answers

---

I posted a thread a couple of weeks ago on RFF asking about a few rangefinders. I tend to lean towards a 35mm or 28mm lens more than any other and even find the 50mm on the Retina a bit much most of the time. So on that note I'm thinking about getting into an M2 or used Bessa R2A. I have a LOT of astigmatism (I wear glasses) and contrary to what I've read I find focusing the couple of RF's I have easier than my SLR's. My problem is that my distance vision leaves a lot to be desired so I'm afraid a viewfinder like on the Bessa R4A at 0.58 is gonna not gonna be enough, even though the framelines might suit me better. I have no idea what magnification the Retina IIc is.

On to the question

:

With my Retina IIc I can see the 50mm framelines without any trouble. Since I can't find an R2A or and M2 anywhere near me I was wondering if anyone could compare the Retina to them? It will really help me narrow down a bit more and make a decision.

 

[pdeeh]

The R2A doesn't have 28mm framelines, so if you like 28mm, it's not the best choice.

You can guesstimate compositions using the "whole" vf, but it is far from ideal.
Unless of course you use a hotshoe vf and just use the inbuilt vf for the rangefinder

 

[Blooze]

The R2A doesn't have 28mm framelines, so if you like 28mm, it's not the best choice.

You can guesstimate compositions using the "whole" vf, but it is far from ideal.
Unless of course you use a hotshoe vf and just use the inbuilt vf for the rangefinder

I guess I should have worded my question better. The M2 and R2A have 35mm framelines though, while the Retina only has 50mm fixed. The Retina seems a little squinty on the viewing side, but I can see the framlines to the edges without having to roll my head around or do some contortionist act I'm afraid something like the R4A would make whatever I'm looking at so small I might have focusing problems.

If any of you have looked through a Retina IIc and also an M2 or R2A with glasses on, how would you compare the ease of seeing the framelines on the outer edge of the M2/R2A -35mm to being able to see the 50mm on the Retina. I'm trying to get a feel for if I could possibly see the 35mm framelines without having to buy one or both just to check. Some people can't see the 35mm framelines on the M2 or R2A with glasses on, but I figured the Retina might have a smaller eyepiece than either of those so it might not be a problem for me.

It's probably a futile question to actually ask as everyone's different.

 

[elekm]

Briefly, the "small c" Retinas have small eyepieces/reticles. The "Big C" models have much larger eyepieces and brighter viewfinders. Plus, they have three framelines visible, which some photographers find to clutter the viewfinder.

The non-folding Retina IIIS and IIS have large, bright viewfinders very similar/nearly identical to the Big C models. Depending on the lens mounted, the Retina IIIS should display the correct framelines. The Retina IIS is a fixed-lens rangefinder with a 45/2.8 Schneider-Kreuznach Xenar and has just one set of framelines.

I think eyeglass wearers all suffer from the same problem when using a camera. The eye must be set further back from the camera's eyepiece, almost ensuring that you'll have a tough time seeing the entire viewfinder. That's true of SLRs, rangefinders and simple viewfinder cameras (but not most TLRs).

 

[250swb]

If you lean towards a 28mm then an M2 isn't going to be much good unless you use an accessory viewfinder. That isn't itself a totally bad idea as you get a big fat 28mm window on the world, but it does slow things down when focusing in one window and composing in another. The M2 does however offer a very clear 35mm viewfinder frame.

Personally, and as a glasses wearer, I'd suggest an M4-P. It often isn't possible for a glasses wearer to see the whole frame in one go, but most soon learn to quickly and unconsciously scan the edges of the frame to see where things are. Glasses that can be pushed against your face with flexible frames are also a help.

Steve

 

[Xmas]

contact lenses and M4-p
glasses with flexible frames and M4-p but you will need an oring or felt pad to minimise eyeglass scratches or a second pair for driving with
some M6 have orings built in
or M2 and 28mm accessory finder with a 28mm you dont need a rangefinder often but again oring needed
Another option is CanonP and '60s Canon lenses or LTM Cosina Voightlander again oring needed
Don't like the Cosina bodies for maintainability

 

[gone]

Retina viewfinders tend to be dark, and of course squinty. It would be hard to find a better viewfinder than an R2a if you wear glasses, but I'd probably prefer to shoot the M2.

 

[Xmas]

Retina viewfinders tend to be dark, and of course squinty. It would be hard to find a better viewfinder than an R2a if you wear glasses, but I'd probably prefer to shoot the M2.

Most any blacksmith can fix a Cloth shutter on a M or CanonP metal one. The Cosinas are more difficult and noisy. My M42 SLR is a Cosina and is well reliable but noisy for people shooting their rangefinders are quieter but still more noisy than a M2 or CanonP.

A beaten up M makes good jewelry...

A Cosina SLR says COSINA on name plate terrible for street cred. You get sympathy.

An M is more expensive than a P or R probably best to get a LTM R if you go Cosina unless you buy new.