Winsor Crosby wrote:
> I am sure Moose will explain it better, but you are ignoring the
> major difference between manual focusing with the E-1 and the 5D, the
> size of the mirror and the large, bright image in the 5D viewfinder
> because it is full frame.
>
You argument holds true for the 1Ds models. The 5D is a slightly
different story. The 30D and 1Ds have 0.9x magnification in the
viewfinder, which I believe means that objects seen in the viewfinder
appear to be close to life size with a standard lens, or some such. The
exact meaning doesn't matter for my point
The 5D, however, has a magnification of 0.71x. The way I figure the
math, that means that the view through a 20/30D with 80 mm lens will be
the same apparent size to the eye as the view of the same subject with a
50 mm lens on the 5D. On a 1Ds with 50 mm lens, the view through the 30D
with 80 mm would be visually the same size on the 1Ds, but would be just
be the center portion of a larger view.
I hope that makes sense. What it means is that some
optical/mechanical/cost compromises were made in the 5D, probably to
meet size/weight/cost targets. So compared to my 300D, the image is a
little bigger and a fair amount brighter, but compared to a 30D, it
would be about the same for any angle of view. So it will not be any
easier to focus manually than a 30D, roughly speaking.
The difference between the 5D view and that through an OM-1 is very
large. The contrast with an OM-4 is less, as Oly went from 97% coverage
of the frame at 0.92x with the OM1(n) and 2(n) to the same coverage at
.86x in the OM3 and 4 series to make room for the LCD info in the
viewfinder. I'm quite happy with the 5D view, but wouldn't want folks to
think it's like a FF OM.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|