I didn't intend to imply that you were stupid. In fact maybe you are
correct as far as the DS is concerned, I however have the *ist-D not
the DS and I have the MZ3, both of which are in my hands right now. The
mirror is considerably larger than the focusing screen on the *ist-D, it
is infact approximatly 3/16 of an inch narrower than the mirror box.
This measurement is replicated in the MZ3 and the mirror box in each
seem to be exactly the same size.
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
It would help if you didn't pose your response as intimating I was
stupid, PJ. That's uncalled for.
No need for apology; I'm not offended.
As I said, I don't have a ZX-5n. However, "oversized mirrors" in SLRs
are typically longer to preclude image cutoff with long lenses, not
wider. If you look at the picture, you'll see that the width of the
mirror in both cases is virtually identical to the width of the
focusing screen reflected in it, and the focusing screens are
certainly different in size. The mirrors are obviously quite
different in their side to side dimension relative to the lens mount
circle, the DS mirror seems slight shorter than the MX mirror (but
longer than the focusing screen's dimension, so it is "oversized"
relative to the format).
I could easily be wrong, but as far as I'm aware the *ist D and *ist
DS use the same mirror/mirror box/viewfinder assembly ... they share
focusing screens as well as prisms and other bits in this subsystem.
Would someone please post a photograph of an *ist D minus its lens
for comparison purposes? and of a ZX-5n as well? That will help
inform all of us as to what looks like what.
Godfrey
On Sep 21, 2005, at 12:29 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
You don't know what you are talking about. The MX has an over sized
mirror, the ZX/MZ mirrors were just big enough, in the *ist-D they
become over sized mirrors. (I have the advantage of owning an MX
LX, (which has an even bigger mirror than the MX), MZ3, and *ist- D,
while I haven't actually measured them, I can tell by eye that the
mirror in the *ist-D and MZ3 are within micrometers of the same
size. The shutter is much smaller on the *ist-D.
Sorry, PJ. I don't have a ZX-5n but I have an MX as well as the
DS. There is no way that the mirror or shutter in a 35mm film SLR
will be the same size as the mirror in a DSLR with a 16x24mm format.
Here's a picture:
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/MX-DS-mirror-comparison.jpg
The mirror box could not be the same size either, since the
necessary points of attachment for the mirror mechanism as well as
clearance for its would be necessarily different too.
On Sep 21, 2005, at 11:20 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
Which means that the lever should just drop in. I hadn't though
about it before but even the mirror looks the same. Only things
that really look different are the size of the shutter, the
focusing screen and the lack of power zoom connections.
It may be the same part, just trimmed in the ZX-5n, but I'd
suspect the similarities simply come from the design side "take
this design, make it flush to the mount". No reason to waste
cycles redesigning the part which doesn't need it.
The mirror box is molded plastic. Compare it to the mirror box
in a the zx5n it even has the same channels.
--
When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and
shout).
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
