I use the wife's old scratched up Nikkormat 50mm lens, works great.
I use the wife's old scratched up Nikkormat 50mm lens, works great.
When you to have my eyes you need all the help you can get. I got a wista 6x loupe
and I am glad, my reading glass'es run about 2-3/4+ but even under dark cloth I still need that loupe to be sharp: each of us have different reasons for the use of loupe's
Lauren MacIntosh
Whats in back of you is the past and whats in front of you is the future now in the middle you have choices to make for yourself:
Can anyone explain what the fuss is with selecting a loupe...
It's exactly the same as using a grain focusing magnifier with an enlarger. More precise control, and more exacting standards. If you're happy with what you get by not using a loupe, then by all means continue without.
Then there are those among us who can't see much closer than arm's length without assistance. I use one pair of glasses for distance vision, to evaluate a scene. I take them off and set up the camera with no glasses. For composition and rough focusing I use a pair of 2 or 3 diopter reading glasses. Then for final focus I use a 4X loupe.
To each his own...
If you care enough to be shooting LF why wouldn't you care about fine focus. A loupe every time thankyou.
I have always used a loupe as a matter of principle (that was the way we got drilled at college). Why bothering with large format (and the associated advantage of capturing more detail) in the first place when being sloppy with critical focussing and forgoing that advantage?
At work (freelancing for commercial studio) we use a Rodenstock (looks like it went trough a war zone, but works like a charm). For my own personal use, I have a Mamiya/Cabin 5x. It really pays getting a high quality loupe instead of the cheap plastic rubbish (been there, done that, got the t-shirt).
Resurrecting one of these old loupe threads, hoping for some advice. I have had cataract surgery and I am corrected for close up. Still can’t get close enough for fine work. Seems like I see best 14-16 inches. The other issue is a lot of the preferred solutions are no longer readily available. Reading glasses may be an option and frees up a hand? Is the translucent base acceptable, especially since working under a dark cloth?
The big camera stores don’t have much specific to this application. Any other resources?
Be kind, please
Ken
When I got my camera, I took a shot without using a loupe, then I took an identical shot using a loupe.
The print with the loupe was much better.
If you need convincing I suggest doing your own experiment.
More expensive loupes I find aren't so much better (this from a hobbyist, mind you) but more desireable because they are easier to use(non-scratch opaque base, maybe tilting focus, neck cord, eye relief, etc...)
My two cents anyway.
"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White
IMO, Not possible to assess critical focus on the GG without a loupe.
Basic mandatory view camera item.
Bernice
Have you looked at this one from Edmund?
https://www.edmundoptics.com/f/opaqu...gnifier/11954/
"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White
Interesting to hear from someone who opted for close up cataract replacement. I presume you need glasses for far away. Has this been a good choice for you?
One thing you might consider is a +4 power monocle, which will let you see about 4 inches away. Something like this
https://www.nearsights.com/collectio...le-black-matte
Bookmarks