On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 19:24:54 -0700, Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> I sort of agree. You can compare the very best of both types of focus
> systems, but many of the generalizations don't work depending on the
> relative quality of the cameras. A Leica vs an OM1 will give the
> advantage to the Leica from WA up to about 100mm. Above that the SLR
> pulls away due to the magnification factor of the lens vs. the fixed
> rangefinder base of the Leica. When you consider depth of field, the
> strengths of slr focus is more useful in my opinion. My Mamiya 7 whose
> rangefinder has a good rep is much more difficult to focus than an OM1
> in dim light and its short rangefinder base makes the focus on the
> longer lenses really dicey. The Leica's is bright and importantly uses
> a very visible split image focus aid while the Mamiya uses a
> superimposed image in a dimmer window. Even a Leica has problems with
> focus on low contrast detail especially if moving like a river. The
> ground glass on an SLR always works.
what about <50mm, say ~40mm, fixed lens compact RFs? how would a CLAed
compact RF (say Oly RD or Canon QL) fare against an OM1n/1-13 with a
f/4-ish lens (or at best a 1.4) in living room range/lighting conditions?
--
/S
aim:iddibhai
icq:104079359
email/msn:msidd004atstudentdotucrdotedu
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|