Hello Mafud
True, I agree.
I myself tend to shoot an increasing ammount of 6x6. I never really liked
square pictures. So, I use my Pentagon/Rolleiflex as if they were a 645,
that I don't need to turn to get portrait/landscape format.
I think I'd prefere 100% coverage. For some jobs it's nice to
Hi,
Like most I was a bit disappointed by the 0.75x viewfinder magnification.
However I rechecked
http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/viewfinder.html
The short list of the latest (in this article) top model camera's autofocus
AND manual focus:
Canon EOS1n : 0.75x
Contax RTSIII: 0.75x
Leica R8:
In a message dated 2/12/01 5:35:24 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What are we overlooking?
Shoot slides with an LX and you KNOW you're seeing all there is; shoot slides
with a 75% magnification finder and you'll always have that sneaky feeling
that somehoe, something
Erwin wrote:
Canon EOS1n : 0.75x
Contax RTSIII: 0.75x
Leica R8: 0.76x
Minolta 9xi: 0.76x
Nikon F5: 0.75x
Olympus OM-4: 0.75x
And now also Pentax MZ-S, which I suspect will be the most expensive 35mm
Pentax for now: 0.75x
What are we overlooking?
Just that four of the six cameras
here,
but since I'm missing it, I don't know what it is I'm missing..
Thanks,
Ed
- Original Message -
From: "Erwin Vereecken" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 5:22 AM
Subject: MZ-S viewfinder magnification
Hi,
Like most I
In a message dated 2/12/01 8:14:50 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bear in mind that some people will not care in the least about a 92%
finder--it will match the cropping on their slides or their drugstore
4x6-inch prints.
But..but aren't *we* responsible for what the
Here's another comparison of modern cameras' viewfinders:
MZ-S92% 0.75x 520g18.3oz Pop-up flash
PZ-1P 92% 0.8x650g22.7oz Pop-up flash
EOS 3 97% 0.72x 780g27.5oz No flash
EOS A2 94%/92% 0.73x 665g23.5oz Pop-up flash
Elan7 92%/90% 0.70x 575g
The question is WHY? They are not all stupid are they :)
Erwin
Of course not, but they think we are.
regards,
Alan Chan
_
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
-
This message is from
But..but aren't *we* responsible for what the final product is? Don't we
need
to *know* the limitations of the camera and doesn't a 92% finder give us
(except for those of us who print odd sizes or edge to edge) the final
product?
That's the beauty of it. The manufacturers have already decided
My main concern isn't the 92%/0.75 viewfinder data, but the posibility that
they have used the viewfinder of the MZ-5 wholesale.
Pål
Now that's really bad!!! Last time I did a side by side comparsion between
Z-1p and MZ-5n. Their difference is quite significant.
regards,
Alan Chan
- Original Message -
From: "Ed Mathews" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: February 12, 2001 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: MZ-S viewfinder magnification
I own an F3HP. It has what I consider to be the best
viewfinder on any
camera I've ever owned. See my other post abou
On Tue, 13 Feb 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Suppose, as someone jokingly suggested, PENTAX 35mm SLR bodies came with
color LCD viewfinders with 24 x 36mm heads-up exposure displays representing
the same size as a 35mm negative? Would that not be 100% magnification and
100% relief?
12 matches
Mail list logo
