On 24 Mar 2005, at 18:21, Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>> As for his contention of the traditional definition of normal being
>> the
>> diagonal of the format, it is 43mm for a 35mm film frame. I have never
>> seen one of those normal lenses.
>
> Pent*x has one, 43/1.9 IIRC. And I also like the 40mm fl instead of 45
> (had
> several ;-)
>
I have one of those 43/1.9 Pentax'en, and it's just lovely. It's my
second-most used lens (I wonder who can guess the most-used lens of
mine...?)
>
>> I suspect that the lower
>> magnification in the 350D compared to the 300D has to do with
>> brightening it up a bit. Those pentamirrors, ya know.
>
> Again, not sure. Pentamirrors are said to give darker views, no matter
> the
> camera (film, digital, full-frame, etc).
>
Any (serious) film-cameras ever made with pentamirrors rather than
pentaprism? I do not recall having seen any...
(serious == something comparable with an OM-single-digit)
>> You also have to
>> step back and realize he is complaining about a camera designed for
>> someone who will never use it for anything but autofocus.
>
> My main concern about the 300D viewfinder is the 'focusing' screen,
> which
> helps about *nothing* to focus, just composition :-( Obviously, these
> screens are designed for AF... with the slow zoom lenses of today, like
> f/3.5-5.6 and worse. They give, however, a surprisingly bright &
> grainless
> image, but lacking the 'bite' to focus accurately -- add the lack of a
> split-image/microprism or whatever help, and you'll get a problem.
>
I am just rambeling here, so bear with me -- it's been a long week and
it's not yet over ;)
I spent a lot of time hating AF....really hating it. I never could get
the N*kon F5 to focus where I wanted it to, and I couldn't lift it for
long enough at one time to focus it manually (boy, is that heavy...),
the Canon EOS photos I took -- and this is way back -- came back
equally out of focus over the entire frame...and so on.
I was convinced that I'd never own and like an AF camera.
Fast-forward about a decade, and the CDFO and I picked up a couple of
basic Pentax AF bodies (MZ-5n and MZ-S). No fancy predictive
ultra-super AF programs to struggle with, just a few spots (all of
which can be disabled except for the center) to focus with. I remember
spending the first months contemplating how to get a microprism-screen
into them (yes, you know you're weird when, after spending 1KEUR on new
camera bodies, your first thought is how to take them apart), but
suddenly realized that the AF sorta just worked. Or rather, I realized
that I wasn't cursing the absence of a microprism all that often
because I had to switch to manual focus only so rarely. And if I do,
the matte-screen is quite alright: with the Pentax Limited lenses
(f1.7, f1.9 -- iirc) there's plenty of light and shallow enough dof to
make it possible. (Never tried with an f5.6-zoom, though, but I suppose
that people buying those aren't your typical MF-users anyways)
The bottom line for me is that, sure, an AF body with a microprism
would be nice. But it's not a determinal factor. What is, is a bright
viewfinder and the ability to get good, solid, fast glass to mount in
front of the film/sensor -- something that's build like an
(OM-compatible) Zuiko, has a long smooth movement of the focusing ring
and none of that fancy "electrically driven, but guided by a ring"
focusing stuff. Also, I just want a center-point-AF -- not a gazillion
dynamically changing points and fancy programming that tells me what it
is I want to have in focus ;)
> BTW, Beattie screens are quite bright, but not easy to focus with some
> lenses (e.g. 28/2). OTOH, the Oly 2-x screens are a *joy* to focus and
> compose ;-)
>
I handed a friend of mine (EOS-something-user) my OM2s/p with its std.
screen. His first comment was "Wow, it's so bright..." ;)
>> And eyeglass
>> wearers can see the whole image. You don't hear that complaint much
>> now.
>
> That's true -- much easier for me to see the whole image on the 300D
> than
> on an OM :-( Another SLR 'from the dark side' with an easy-to-see 100%
> viewfinder is the Nik*n F3 -- this time with a rather low
> magnification.
>
N*kon f3 was a good body.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|