If you build a 36x24, put in a real viewfinder which nobody has yet

beholder3 · 04-13-2013, 03:09 AM

[deleted]

Last edited by beholder3; 08-11-2013 at 06:39 AM. Reason: [deleted]

RonHendriks1966 · 04-13-2013, 03:43 AM

wow differences are huge.

**Kerrowdown** · 04-13-2013, 03:47 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by beholder3

Just look at Pentax LX

Tell me about it, I've always missed my LX view on life.

Interchangeable for various specialised applications too.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/lens-clubs/167350d1365504449-club-goldenlx.jpg

carrrlangas · 04-13-2013, 12:03 PM

uff.. good point

stevebrot · 04-13-2013, 02:07 PM

This issue is readily apparent to those of us that use a mix of digital and film SLRs. With the better manual-focus film cameras, the viewfinder is like looking through a window and a big one at that. Looking at the chart, one has to wonder why there is a downward trend in viewfinder magnification with the advent of AF cameras in general.

Steve

beholder3 · 04-13-2013, 02:17 PM

[deleted]

**TomB_tx** · 04-13-2013, 03:38 PM

With AF the viewfinder is used for composition, not focus, so they don't see the need for an easy-to-focus viewfinder for us manual dinosaurs. They see live-view as the future.

stevebrot · 04-13-2013, 04:52 PM

Originally posted by beholder3

Maybe because pre AF the metering sensor sat where now the AF sensor is. The metering sensor moved upwards to the prism dome.

Nah...very few manual focus film cameras metered through a half-silvered main mirror. The sensors on most TTL metered SLRs flanked the viewfinder and measured light off the focus screen.

You may be on to something though in regards to the mirror. AF cameras deliver significantly less light to the focus screen. Might it be that the lower magnification provides in some way for greater apparent brightness? This is just a guess. Focus screen and viewfinder theory represents sort of a black art to me.

Steve

jkomp316 · 04-13-2013, 10:51 PM

This is why I still use a *ist DS. Its the cheapest camera with a pentaprism. I wanted to buy a Kx/Kr but the pentamirror turned me away with all the manual glass I have. At least the K30 is a step in the right direction.

beholder3 · 04-14-2013, 01:17 AM

[deleted]

tclausen · 04-14-2013, 02:22 AM

Originally posted by stevebrot

Nah...very few manual focus film cameras metered through a half-silvered main mirror. The sensors on most TTL metered SLRs flanked the viewfinder and measured light off the focus screen.

<SNIP>

Hmm...

As far as I recall, a fair amount of film SLRs measured off-the-film during exposure (notably for dealing with changing conditions such as other people's flash etc), and so must have exposure meeter cells pointed towards the film and not on the focus screen.

At least, that was the case of the OM2n, OM2s/p, OM3(T(i)) and OM4(T(i)) - which I used during the film-non-AF period. These had a half-silvered mirror (&, IIRC, a second mirror bouncing the light down on the cell sitting in front and pointing towards the film plane.

I do not remember that the OM viewfinders were anything but extremely bright

Of course, I do not know - I spent more time taking pictures than pondering what other cameras of other makes did - but I'd have guessed that that'd have been a fairly common configuration?

Now that I come to think of it, I actually do not know how the MZ-S does this, time to do some investigations....

deus ursus · 04-14-2013, 08:02 AM

AFAIK only Pentax LX and the Olympus OM system has OTF metering. The others have the meter in the prism housing. That's maybe the biggest advantage with LX compared to the other systems with interchangable finders (Nikon F3, Canon F-1). With LX you get metered exposure with any finder. With the others you don't.

**Kerrowdown** · 04-14-2013, 08:11 AM

Originally posted by deus ursus

Pentax LX and the Olympus OM system has OTF metering

Both technically away ahead of there time.

The LX also it worked really well on long exposures, the light meter goes all the way down to -6.5 ev that makes 125 seconds at 100 ASA @ F1.2, but I'm sure it went longer if it needed too.

stevebrot · 04-14-2013, 09:19 AM

Originally posted by kerrowdown

...the light meter goes all the way down to -6.5 ev...

The actual sensitivity of the LX meter is much more ordinary. The oft-quoted -6.5 EV is the effective lower range in Av mode using exposure-time OTF (accumulation) metering. The base meter range (as evidenced in the spec for M mode) is a perfectly respectable 1 EV(100) to 19 EV(100).

I have always thought it strange that Pentax drew the the lower limit at -6.5 EV for Av mode since a lower value should be possible. Anyone done an exposure with an LX at less than -6.5 EV?

Steve

deus ursus · 04-14-2013, 02:51 PM

One thing that I've wondered a lot about: How come the finder coverage on most of those analogue cameras were less than 100 %? Even on professional cameras like Pentax LX and Olympus OM1 the coverage was 96 % and 97 % respectively. I'm sure there is no advantage not seeing the whole picture when you're photographing, or is it something I've missed?

04-13-2013, 03:09 AM	#1
beholder3 Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 3,112	If you build a 36x24, put in a real viewfinder which nobody has yet [deleted] Last edited by beholder3; 08-11-2013 at 06:39 AM. Reason: [deleted]

04-13-2013, 02:07 PM	#5
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	This issue is readily apparent to those of us that use a mix of digital and film SLRs. With the better manual-focus film cameras, the viewfinder is like looking through a window and a big one at that. Looking at the chart, one has to wonder why there is a downward trend in viewfinder magnification with the advent of AF cameras in general. Steve Last edited by stevebrot; 04-13-2013 at 02:14 PM.

04-13-2013, 02:17 PM	#6
beholder3 Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 3,112 Original Poster	[deleted] Last edited by beholder3; 08-11-2013 at 07:10 AM. Reason: [deleted]

04-14-2013, 01:17 AM	#10
beholder3 Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 3,112 Original Poster	[deleted] Last edited by beholder3; 08-11-2013 at 07:10 AM. Reason: [deleted]

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
MX-1 - nobody has one yet?	stormtech	Pentax Compact Cameras	2	02-17-2013 09:50 PM
What would you do if you experience a SDM failure of a $800+ lens?	LeDave	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	31	08-03-2012 03:01 PM
Do you put a newly acquired lens through a standard set of tests?	MSL	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	03-26-2012 02:22 PM
NEWT: You Can't Put a Gun Rack in a Volt!	jogiba	General Talk	17	02-23-2012 11:45 PM
I swear if you put soccer players in a hockey rink	Peter Zack	General Talk	75	06-28-2010 06:24 AM

04-13-2013, 03:43 AM	#2
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	wow differences are huge.

04-13-2013, 03:47 AM - 1 Like	#3
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,804	Originally posted by beholder3 Just look at Pentax LX Tell me about it, I've always missed my LX view on life. Interchangeable for various specialised applications too. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/lens-clubs/167350d1365504449-club-goldenlx.jpg

04-13-2013, 12:03 PM	#4
carrrlangas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Joensuu (Finland) Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,761	uff.. good point

04-13-2013, 03:38 PM	#7
TomB_tx Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,446	With AF the viewfinder is used for composition, not focus, so they don't see the need for an easy-to-focus viewfinder for us manual dinosaurs. They see live-view as the future.

04-13-2013, 04:52 PM	#8
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by beholder3 Maybe because pre AF the metering sensor sat where now the AF sensor is. The metering sensor moved upwards to the prism dome. Nah...very few manual focus film cameras metered through a half-silvered main mirror. The sensors on most TTL metered SLRs flanked the viewfinder and measured light off the focus screen. You may be on to something though in regards to the mirror. AF cameras deliver significantly less light to the focus screen. Might it be that the lower magnification provides in some way for greater apparent brightness? This is just a guess. Focus screen and viewfinder theory represents sort of a black art to me. Steve

04-13-2013, 10:51 PM	#9
jkomp316 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 227	This is why I still use a *ist DS. Its the cheapest camera with a pentaprism. I wanted to buy a Kx/Kr but the pentamirror turned me away with all the manual glass I have. At least the K30 is a step in the right direction.

04-14-2013, 02:22 AM	#11
tclausen Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,397	Originally posted by stevebrot Nah...very few manual focus film cameras metered through a half-silvered main mirror. The sensors on most TTL metered SLRs flanked the viewfinder and measured light off the focus screen. <SNIP> Hmm... As far as I recall, a fair amount of film SLRs measured off-the-film during exposure (notably for dealing with changing conditions such as other people's flash etc), and so must have exposure meeter cells pointed towards the film and not on the focus screen. At least, that was the case of the OM2n, OM2s/p, OM3(T(i)) and OM4(T(i)) - which I used during the film-non-AF period. These had a half-silvered mirror (&, IIRC, a second mirror bouncing the light down on the cell sitting in front and pointing towards the film plane. I do not remember that the OM viewfinders were anything but extremely bright Of course, I do not know - I spent more time taking pictures than pondering what other cameras of other makes did - but I'd have guessed that that'd have been a fairly common configuration? Now that I come to think of it, I actually do not know how the MZ-S does this, time to do some investigations....

04-14-2013, 08:02 AM	#12
deus ursus Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Stårheim, Norway Posts: 658	AFAIK only Pentax LX and the Olympus OM system has OTF metering. The others have the meter in the prism housing. That's maybe the biggest advantage with LX compared to the other systems with interchangable finders (Nikon F3, Canon F-1). With LX you get metered exposure with any finder. With the others you don't.

04-14-2013, 08:11 AM	#13
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,804	Originally posted by deus ursus Pentax LX and the Olympus OM system has OTF metering Both technically away ahead of there time. The LX also it worked really well on long exposures, the light meter goes all the way down to -6.5 ev that makes 125 seconds at 100 ASA @ F1.2, but I'm sure it went longer if it needed too.

04-14-2013, 09:19 AM	#14
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by kerrowdown ...the light meter goes all the way down to -6.5 ev... The actual sensitivity of the LX meter is much more ordinary. The oft-quoted -6.5 EV is the effective lower range in Av mode using exposure-time OTF (accumulation) metering. The base meter range (as evidenced in the spec for M mode) is a perfectly respectable 1 EV(100) to 19 EV(100). I have always thought it strange that Pentax drew the the lower limit at -6.5 EV for Av mode since a lower value should be possible. Anyone done an exposure with an LX at less than -6.5 EV? Steve

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-14-2013, 02:51 PM	#15
deus ursus Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Stårheim, Norway Posts: 658	One thing that I've wondered a lot about: How come the finder coverage on most of those analogue cameras were less than 100 %? Even on professional cameras like Pentax LX and Olympus OM1 the coverage was 96 % and 97 % respectively. I'm sure there is no advantage not seeing the whole picture when you're photographing, or is it something I've missed?