Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > 120 film RF Folders

120 film RF Folders 120/220 Format Folding Rangefinders, including the various classic Zeiss Ikontas, Voigtlander Bessas, and their Ruskie copies.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Compensating for parallax error
Old 03-31-2010   #1
Krzys
Registered User
 
Krzys is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 373
Compensating for parallax error

Keith has loaned me a fantastic 6x6 russian folder. I was using it today and since I've never really wrapped my head around parallax compensation at two angles (I have only compensated for finders above the lens, not above and to the left) I think I composed backwards.

Just to clarify...is this the correct understanding of taking lens to viewfinder fov.



^ Why can't they etch a mark or put in a frameline that shows the edge at minimum focusing distance. Without it I'll just keep over or under compensating until I see my rolls and get it right!
__________________


Last edited by Krzys : 03-31-2010 at 04:04.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-31-2010   #2
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
 
batterytypehah!'s Avatar
 
batterytypehah! is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 1,795
Yes. Assuming the VF is not compensating in any way on its own and is in fact parallel to the lens axis.

I've said this before: I don't trust any kind of built-in parallax compensation. Give me a well-adjusted (i.e. straight and parallel) VF instead. I have a brain of my own to compensate. I use the TLR technique (frame, move taking lens to where viewing lens was, shoot) or I aim "off" to begin with.

The dirty little secret is that, if your VF is parallel (check with ground glass and aimed at the moon, for example), you aim at a spot on your subject that's off by the same amount as the VF is in relation to the lens.

Say the VF is 1 inch high and 1 inch to the left. Always aim 1" high and to the left on your subject. Insignificant at infinity, more significant the closer you get and the longer your lens. But always the same amount on the subject.
__________________
WANTED: Fujimoto/Lucky 70M negative carrier

“Hair-splitting, of course. But hey, it's a LEICA. Probably there are those who get excited about the colour of the hairs you split.” – Roger Hicks

Contax IIa + Leica IIIf + M3 (project) + Zorki-1 (project) + Fuji GS645 + FED-2 + Vitomatic II + Revue 400SE + Olympus XA + more + still more
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-31-2010   #3
payasam
a.k.a. Mukul Dube
 
payasam's Avatar
 
payasam is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Delhi, India
Age: 66
Posts: 4,429
Just how much of the top and the left of the finder image will not be recorded on film should become clear after half a dozen photos. It should then be a simple matter to aim the camera upwards and to the left, naturally with a margin of safety.

Etched marks should be possible. Finders like the SBLOO have dashed or dotted lines to indicate field of view at near range.
__________________
"Payasam" means a sloppy pudding. Little kids love it, and I'm a little kid with a big grey beard and diabetes.
Olympus E-3, Sony A7; four Zuiko Digital lenses; Sony FE 28-70 zoom; Nikkor 24/2.8, Nikkor 35/2, Nikkor 50/1.4, Micro-Nikkor 55/2.8, Nikkor 85/2, Nikkor 105/2.5
RFF gallery
Flickr gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-31-2010   #4
oftheherd
Registered User
 
oftheherd's Avatar
 
oftheherd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,613
Next time try a Mamiya Universal or Super Press 23. BTW, those who have them, do the Mamiya 6 and Mamiya 7 have moving paralax framelines?
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-31-2010   #5
Ken Smith
Why yes Ma'am - it folds
 
Ken Smith's Avatar
 
Ken Smith is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Age: 57
Posts: 266
Voigtlander's Bessa I has parallax correction via a dial actuated mask in the viewfinder for both 645 & 6x9. The mask roughly corrects the view for 5-8' and then for 8' to infinity.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-31-2010   #6
Finder
-
 
Finder is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,055
Mamiya 6 and 6MF have parallax correction. The Hexar AF compensates for parallax and magnification.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-02-2010   #7
Krzys
Registered User
 
Krzys is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 373
After a roll it turns out that this is the most accurate representation.

__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 04-02-2010   #8
P C Headland
Registered User
 
P C Headland is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Windy Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 342
The Certo Six, while not having a parallax corrected viewfinder, has a parallax correct lens!
__________________
My RFF Gallery

Flickr -- Minus
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-29-2011   #9
shine
Registered User
 
shine's Avatar
 
shine is offline
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 37
Does Zeiss Super Ikonta BX post war 533/16 have parallax issue or corrected parallax?

Sorry, yet to develop my 1st roll from it. Still have some frame left.
__________________
---
I. Eden
Shine Photography & Design Studio
---
Rolleiflex 2.8C Planar (1954) - Rolleiflex 2.8F Planar (1962) - Rolleiflex 3.5E Planar (1956) - Rolleiflex T Type 1 (1958) - Rolleiflex T Type 3 (1966) - Zeiss Super Ikonta II BX 533/16 (1952) - Zeiss Ikon Baby Box 54/18 (1931) - Ensign Ful-Vue II (1950)- Canon EOS-5DMkII - Canon EOS-40D - Canon EOS-1000FN - Canon Powershot G9
---
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-30-2011   #10
oftheherd
Registered User
 
oftheherd's Avatar
 
oftheherd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by shine View Post
Does Zeiss Super Ikonta BX post war 533/16 have parallax issue or corrected parallax?

Sorry, yet to develop my 1st roll from it. Still have some frame left.
Hopefully someone will be able to answer for you. Usually you will find something that moves in a way to indicate parallax correction if it has it. Most of the old folders did not, but as you see from this post, some certainly did. Welta did it on some of their non-RF folders with a viewfinder that moved when you moved a slider forward.

If oneone can answer your question, please let us know when you do find out.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-30-2011   #11
oftheherd
Registered User
 
oftheherd's Avatar
 
oftheherd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,613
BTW, you might want to look at these sites while you wait for someone to give you an answer:

http://www.cameraquest.com/zikontb.htm

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...hp/t-2951.html

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZICG/
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-30-2011   #12
graywolf
Registered User
 
graywolf is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 525
Seems like some basic info on old time viewfinders might help folks.

First before the Nikon F came out no one even expected a viewfinder to be very accurate. If you needed very accurate framing you used a view camera with a ground glass back. And even some of them were not real precise because the film holders were not.

OK, the way they did it was like the OP's second post. Notice that the actual view is much smaller than the negative area. You adjusted by cropping when you made your print. Now I know that cropping became a no-no in the 1970, mostly to show that the photographer was rich enough to afford a Nikon F or F2. The other just pretended that what they got was what the wanted, but their camera actually showed about the area of a mounted slide (22mm x 34mm).

But with most larger format cameras cropping was the norm. Most view finders showed about 85-90% of frame, some times much less, and were not too precise in direction. And, that varied from camera to camera, even with the same brand and model, so about the only way you can determine just where to point the camera was by experience.

Notice that you still have to do it that way with older cameras, no one can tell you exactly what to expect, except the former owner of the camera if he actually used it much.

If your old camera has parallax adjustment all it does is bring the close up image closer to the center of the negative, the framing is still quite a bit smaller than actual negative image. So, the best advice is to tell you that cropping is your friend, and suggest that you frame rather loosely.

To put it another way, consider the viewfinder an aiming device rather than a framing device. That way you do not have to worry too much about not being able to see the edges of the view finder if you wear glasses like I do.
__________________
Tom
www.tomrit.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-30-2011   #13
Ernst Dinkla
Registered User
 
Ernst Dinkla is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 298
[quote= The Hexar AF compensates for parallax and magnification.[/quote]

And that goes back to the Konica Pearl IV. Which was copied by the Polaroid Pathfinders instant rollfilm folder cameras, 110A, 110B, 120, 150 and several other related models have parallax and field of view compensation. The 110B and the 900 in a combined range- and viewfinder that borrowed a lot from the Konica Paerl IV one.

Ernst Dinkla
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-30-2011   #14
t6un
Registered User
 
t6un is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 151
My experience with Iskra is so far that I need to compensate for parallax only in vertical direction. With Zorki I always assumed that the rangefinder spot stays in the center of the viewfinder, and positioned my eye according to that, then compensated for parallax. This is different with Iskra because it's rangefinder spot moves together with the moving image. (I think most people use the rangefinder spot as a reference for the viewfinder edges, simply because it is so much less blurry than the edges themselves in the primitive russian viewfinder.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-30-2011   #15
Pablito
coco frío
 
Pablito's Avatar
 
Pablito is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Salsipuedes
Posts: 3,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finder View Post
The Hexar AF compensates for parallax and magnification.
And yet it's terribly inaccurate. One of the reasons I sold the camera. Leica M's , even the late ones with notoriously bad frame lines, are better.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 15:44.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.