Winsor Crosby wrote:
> Have you actually made a comparison? When you take format dimensions
> and eyepiece magnification into effect, there is really very little
> difference between the 5D viewfinder image size and one of the better
> small sensor viewfinders like the one in a D200. 22mm v. 25mm for the
> long dimension. .71 magnification seems to throw away much of the
> advantage of the larger format, at least for seeing what you are
> doing.
I didn't say anything about apparent size. C certainly did make a
compromise there, I assume for size. But it's not all that great a
compromise, see below.
> I have read enough subjective judgments that the brightness is
> no better than a 20D, just a little bigger, that it makes me wonder.
>
It's really hard to make accurate judgments with our eyes, they adapt so
quickly and well. Any brightness judgment made in bright light will be
meaningless, as the irises in the eyes will be stopped down.
I've just sat here in a dim room (matching its occupant), for a while
with OM-1, 300D and 5D, all with SC 50/1.8 Zuikos mounted. Taking them
in pairs, one in each hand, I've been switching back and forth, looking
at a dimly lit bookcase with some nice shadows, two different lighting
levels, 1 1/2 sec. & 1/2 sec. - iso 1000, f1.8.
The 300D view is much smaller and much dimmer than the 5D. The
difference is huge, with the 300D unusable in the dimmer lighting. Sorry
I don't have a 20/30D. They should be the same size image, but brighter
than the 300D, since they have true prisms, rather than a box of
mirrors. I don't know how much difference that would make.
The OM-1 image is bigger and a little brighter than the 5D. Neither
difference is very great. If I put one down and pick the other up, the
time is great enough, and my eyes adapt to away from viewfinder, then to
new viewfinder, that I can't really see the differences. It's only when
switching rapidly back and forth that I see the differences.
The OM-1 can be focused without too much difficulty in the dimmer light.
The matte and micro prism areas are useless, but the split image worked
on the vertical lines where dark and light books abut. On a more
amorphous image, I don't think I could focus. Substituting an AF 50/1.8
on the 5D, it focuses very quickly, no thinking or hunting, just focus -
now.
> For what it is worth. the finder in my 200D is a tad brighter than
> the one in my OM1n, but a little bit smaller because the Olympus has .
> 84 eyepiece magnification.
>
Unfortunately, I don't have a 200D either. ;-) I would say that it
would be harder to make a good comparison if you don't have matching
lenses. And again, any comparison in anything other than rather dim
light doesn't tell you anything about relative viewfinder brightness.
Interesting exercise. I learned some things I didn't know before (or
have forgotten). Thanks
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|