I see that the OM-4 and 4-Ti have the same prism part number as the
OM-3Ti. I would expect that's the most critical part in the viewing path.
Chuck Norcutt
Dawid Loubser wrote:
> On 20 Aug 2010, at 5:59 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>
>> By specification, at least, the 3-Ti
>> is not special in the viewfinder department.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>
> I know! Which is why I couldn't believe how much nicer it was
> than the OM-1 and OM-2 finders I know so intimately well by now.
>
> I guess it has something to do with this: The OM-1 finder is
> spectacular. Like in, no other SLR easily comes close, and
> certainly not a single Digital SLR currently made.
>
> The fact that the OM-3Ti (and, I suspect all other 3- and 4-series
> bodies
> with a 2-series focusing screen, I never tried them) is just so much
> brighter, crisper, and higher-contrast, just puts it over the top.
> The biggest difference, I find, is that it does not at all flare, where
> the OM-1 finder is very prone to flaring, even though the pictures
> turn out fine.
>
> We're talking about that last 5% of greatness here.
>
> D.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|