"Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" wrote:
> Two reasons. First my slides are all mounted and when I used
> the 100% viewfinder I lost some of the image.
> [...]
> Second, I found the 100% viewfinder to be a problem when I used print film
> and
> also when I wanted to print the image. If you are out to the edges, you
> need
> a 8x12 image to get it all. Periodicals cannot use an 8x12 unless they
> crop it for a cover, etc. For these and some other reasons, I prefer a
> viewfinder like the Elan IIe or EOS3.
Hi Peter,
Thanks. Those would pose problems, wouldn't it. I've never owned
or used a camera that did 100%, and so I hadn't realized how it
might actually work against me. The only times I've ever bothered
to examine frames under a loupe have been with mounted slides,
and it hadn't dawn on me that I wasn't seeing the whole frame. So
I never saw what I wasn't missing.
Well, you've really made my day. Now this "limitation" no longer
bothers me! And now the decision by camera manufacturers to
design cameras with smaller viewfinders makes a whole lot more
sense. I wonder why I've never heard this before...
take care,
Chris
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
