No, it's not true. Gentlemen, the viewfinder is not small because the sensor
is small. They could put a 20x on it if they felt like it. The view is small
because they save money by using a smaller pentaprism. They can use a smaller
pentaprism if the magnification is low.
Step back. Take a breath. Get some O2 up there. Exhale. Now consider this:
Is a first run movie "small" because the sensor is small? No. There are
optics between the sensor and what you see. The sensor size has *NO* bearing
on the image size that you see.
Lama
PS, If you missed the point, don't worry. It will come up every week in the
new year.
> From: Ross Orr <voxbongo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Is this really true? Was the Olympus Pen this way?
Some one was banging on the "Small Viewfinder Myth" again this week:
> >Because the image and mirror is so much smaller. That is the downside
> >of a 2x focal length equivalence.
> through one once, a long time ago.)
Kicked off by an innocent observation:
> > > And I just don't understand why the viewfinder magnification is so
> > > much smaller than life size.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|