I beg to differ. I checked both 5n and ist*d, side by side, both with a dark zoom(f/4) and a bright prime (f/1.4). The 5n viewfinder despite its lower coverage and smaller magnification is obviously larger. It's also brighter (noticeable difference even at 1.4) hence easier to focus, though the focus screen of *ist d seems improved, with a finer texture. It seems to me Pentax can't do better than the *ist D viewfinder: better coverage can't be achieved without higher build tolerances - that will boost the price accordingly. Also, to achieve brighter image they can only increase the transparency of the matte field of the focusing screen which will impact negatively manual focusing accuracy. The major constraint is the reduced sensor area; as soon as they'll mount a larger sensor, the increased image area will demand less magnification to bring it at the comfortable view size.
BTW, to see a really horrible viewfinder pick an Olympus E. As for *ist d I'm not saying the viewfinder is unusable, just that is still far from a middle of the road film SLR. Servus, Alin E.R.N. wrote: ERNR> Although, IMO, the *istD viewfinder is no worse than the ZX-5n finder; ERNR> maybe even better. .-)
