Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-12-2016, 11:13 AM   #31
Forum Member
Pentaxis's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 90
QuoteOriginally posted by gaweidert Quote
I have to admit that I am put off by the .7x magnification of the viewfinder. When I got to this fact when reading the specs it really deflated me. I was hoping for a viewfinder more akin to my Ricoh XRM or Pentax Spotmatic II. I want a split image center surrounded by a micro prism circle for my old eyes, I prefer manual focus to auto focus. Most of the shots with my Tamron 70-210 F2.8 and Pentax 150-450 are made using manual focus.

After 45 years of using manual focus lenses I am pretty good at it. But I need a better viewfinder to help me accomplish this. Focus confirmation on my K5 is spotty at best. My k5-IIs is a bit better and the K3 even better, but I want the lens to focus where I want to it and not some computer algorithm. I'm really bummed out about this. Pentax let me down a bit with this camera. It has been a long wait and I had hoped for a true full frame camera in all respects. And yes I was prepared to pay for it. I will probably still get it, but not until after actually handling one.

I know I am sounding old and set in my ways, but not all the old ways are the wrong way.

On a happier note, the crocuses are in full bloom with it the promise of spring and for me personally, retirement.
I very much agree with your opinion. I have never owned a digital SLR but have been using film SLRs intermittently since the1960's. My current cameras are ME Super and MG. Even the cheap and cheerful MG has a viewfinder magnification much greater than any digital SLR that I have heard of.

My comments here are not meant to detract from the K-1 camera. I am sure it will be popular and I congratulate Ricoh and Pentax on its development. I have just come to the conclusion that it is just not the camera that I want. Of course, I don't have the opportunity to handle the actual K-1 so my judgement is based purely upon the reading of the camera specification. Reality might not be as bad as I imagine.

These disappointing viewfinder facts are both baffling and frustrating me. I don't want autofocus lenses either, I just want to be able to use my Pentax-M lenses on a full frame digital SLR body that has a viewfinder of film-body level quality and characteristics. The viewfinder is, for me, one of the most important elements of any camera. Staring at a camera back display is not my idea of progress, nor is viewing a relatively small, dim pentaprism finder, containing numerous visual distractions. Blinking"autofocus points", electronic levels, GPS and tilting camera-back displays are totally inessential for me, and all add weight, complexity and cost to the camera.

Surely there must be a market for such a simple camera for the likes of you and me.

03-12-2016, 11:33 AM - 1 Like   #32
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,703
I'm amazed how people were expecting Pentax to match the magnification of some old manual cameras, in a $1800/2000 euro FF DSLR no less, despite no other manufacturer doing that at any price. What a disappointment!
03-12-2016, 11:58 AM   #33
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,978
It should come as no surprise since Pentax set the bar when it came to big bright viewfinders.
03-12-2016, 12:03 PM   #34
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,913
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I'm amazed how people were expecting Pentax to match the magnification of some old manual cameras, in a $1800/2000 euro FF DSLR no less, despite no other manufacturer doing that at any price. What a disappointment!

I was not expecting the K1 to be as inexpensive as it is. I was expecting a full frame camera at full frame prices. As I stated in my post I was prepared to pay more. The K1 is a heck of a camera for the price. Ricoh has hit a home run with it for sure. But a grand slam model to go with it would be even better. If it was $1,500 more and had I full size viewfinder I would definitely jump on it.

I may still get one but will need to handle one first to see how the viewfinder really looks to me. As I stated, a viewfinder similar in size to my SLR's is important for me. More so than having multiple custom settings etc. Heck, to me it is more important than having auto focus.

QUESTION TO ADMIN!!!!!!!!! Why does Ricoh show up as a spelling error on this site when you are composing a reply or post?

03-12-2016, 12:07 PM   #35
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,909
According to the other viewfinder thread, the .7x magnification actually serves to 'focus' and brighten the viewfinder substantially; it would be much darker at 100% magnification. Don't forget the mirror is half-silvered and a significant part of the light goes to the AF sensor, while another significant portion leaks into the new 'transparent' LCD. However - reports are the viewfinder is very bright and manual focusing on the matte screen is easier than K-3 / K-3II.

If you want all the viewfinder features and the AF you really can't have a 100%, 1:1 Mag VF.
03-12-2016, 12:44 PM   #36
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,978
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
If you want all the viewfinder features and the AF you really can't have a 100%, 1:1 Mag VF.
With that type of thinking it's a good thing you're not on the development team . . .

Pentax and Ricoh have previously provided amazing innovations and we want them to continue.
03-12-2016, 12:48 PM   #37
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,913
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
According to the other viewfinder thread, the .7x magnification actually serves to 'focus' and brighten the viewfinder substantially; it would be much darker at 100% magnification. Don't forget the mirror is half-silvered and a significant part of the light goes to the AF sensor, while another significant portion leaks into the new 'transparent' LCD. However - reports are the viewfinder is very bright and manual focusing on the matte screen is easier than K-3 / K-3II.

If you want all the viewfinder features and the AF you really can't have a 100%, 1:1 Mag VF.

I know, but AF is not a necessity for me. I find myself using manual focus most of the time even on my auto focus lenses. Of course having an aperture ring and a hyperfocal distance scale on a lens are important to me too. Old friends that I have relied upon over the years. Very fast and easy to use.

Hopefully your statement on ease of manual focus is true.
03-12-2016, 12:54 PM   #38
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,909
QuoteOriginally posted by LesDMess Quote
With that type of thinking it's a good thing you're not on the development team . . .

Pentax and Ricoh have previously provided amazing innovations and we want them to continue.
I'm not even on the 'ask what he thinks' team.

QuoteOriginally posted by gaweidert Quote
I know, but AF is not a necessity for me. I find myself using manual focus most of the time even on my auto focus lenses. Of course having an aperture ring and a hyperfocal distance scale on a lens are important to me too. Old friends that I have relied upon over the years. Very fast and easy to use.

Hopefully your statement on ease of manual focus is true.
My MF - AF lenses ratio is 5:1. Which is why I have film cameras.

Seriously, I get it - I want an MX viewfinder as much as anyone - but I don't think it's going to happen soon, and certainly not for $1,700. .


Last edited by monochrome; 03-12-2016 at 01:15 PM.
03-12-2016, 01:10 PM   #39
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,703
QuoteOriginally posted by gaweidert Quote
I was not expecting the K1 to be as inexpensive as it is. I was expecting a full frame camera at full frame prices. As I stated in my post I was prepared to pay more. The K1 is a heck of a camera for the price. Ricoh has hit a home run with it for sure. But a grand slam model to go with it would be even better. If it was $1,500 more and had I full size viewfinder I would definitely jump on it.

I may still get one but will need to handle one first to see how the viewfinder really looks to me. As I stated, a viewfinder similar in size to my SLR's is important for me. More so than having multiple custom settings etc. Heck, to me it is more important than having auto focus.
I appreciate when people are willing to pay for what they're asking. Though at $3500, this camera would be a lot harder to sell - even if it had the best viewfinder on any DSLR.
Unfortunately, a 0.95x "full frame" viewfinder on a DSLR is unrealistic for several reasons - e.g. viewfinders getting only part of the light, autofocus being the primary mode, information display using up space.
03-12-2016, 01:19 PM - 1 Like   #40
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,978
In the 50's when everyone was making mostly rangefinders - Nikon and Canon only made rangefinders, Pentax went straight to an SLR design and solved the biggest problem of the SLR viewfinder going blank after firing the shutter with the instant return mirror. Prior to 1957, everyone made rangefinders but after the original Asahi Pentax everything changed.



I see no reason they can't solve such a simple thing as a big bright viewfinder if they wanted to.

You'll notice they had a lifesize viewfinder then!
03-12-2016, 01:59 PM   #41
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,909
QuoteOriginally posted by LesDMess Quote
I see no reason they can't solve such a simple thing as a big bright viewfinder if they wanted to. You'll notice they had a lifesize viewfinder then!
Notice? I have a K and an SV sitting on the desk as I type*. Of course, neither even had a meter needle in the viewfinder, and as you say, Nikon and Canon were laggards then.

The things we find to complain about. Yikes.


* And KX, K2, MX, MESuper, SuperProgram and LX / FA-1 / FB-FC-FD in the drawer. And SP, ES, ESII and SP-F at the office.
03-12-2016, 02:13 PM   #42
Pentaxian
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,234
The major issue in attaining a bigger viewfinder image is not the eyepiece magnification (that can be solved with the addition of an external magnifier) it's the autofocus system that channels a significant portion of the light away from the focussing screen, thus making the resultant screen image dimmer. The laws of physics govern the amount of light left for the eyepiece, so the only way you'll achieve what some people are asking for is for the manufacturer to supply a camera that is strictly manual focus.

Good luck with selling that at an acceptable price and making a profit from it.

I sympathise with the notion of an eyepiece image that is akin to film SLRs. My first SLR was in the early 1970s and was a Pentax S3. I still have a SP-F, a K2DMD and an LX, so I know what a good viewfinder image looks like, too.

The simple fact of the matter is that the vast majority of the market for a modern DSLR doesn't share that experience, and wants a good autofocus camera, so the rest of us just have to make do with what's on offer.

Given that the K-1 is available at such a reasonable price, however, I suggest that people who were willing to pay more and want a dedicated MF Pentax DSLR can think about customising a K-1 by replacing the mirror with one from a film SLR and likewise with the focussing screen. Obviously, that will require a technician's skill set to undertake, as they're not intended to be replaced, but they were assembled by human beings, so it should be achievable, if that is your essential requirement. I imagine that a good technician could do what you want in no more than two days of work. At $80 per hour, that makes the cost of labour less than $1,300. Of course, you'll have to find a compatible mirror and focussing screen (thickness will be the main parameter involved, as older SLRs will have bigger mirrors and screens that can be cut down) so that's a threshold issue. Of course, you'll lose warranty in the process, so you'll have to factor that into your thinking. You'll also lose focus confirmation, as well.

If I really wanted a dedicated MF Pentax DSLR, I'd seriously consider doing that, but I don't, so I'll take what Ricoh is serving up to me. The K-1 will have a slightly bigger and much brighter vewfinder image than the K-3, so I reckon I'll be happy using my MF lenses on that, especially the A50/1.2.

Last edited by RobA_Oz; 03-12-2016 at 03:26 PM.
03-12-2016, 02:35 PM   #43
Veteran Member
Tan68's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 396
QuoteOriginally posted by gaweidert Quote
....

QUESTION TO ADMIN!!!!!!!!! Why does Ricoh show up as a spelling error on this site when you are composing a reply or post?
I think spell check is built into your browser rather than built into the site...
I tested this in a very secretive way and I am nearly 100% right.
03-12-2016, 02:37 PM   #44
Pentaxian
pete-tarmigan's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Conception Bay South, New-fun-land
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 986
QuoteOriginally posted by LesDMess Quote
In the 50's when everyone was making mostly rangefinders - Nikon and Canon only made rangefinders, Pentax went straight to an SLR design and solved the biggest problem of the SLR viewfinder going blank after firing the shutter with the instant return mirror. Prior to 1957, everyone made rangefinders but after the original Asahi Pentax everything changed.

I see no reason they can't solve such a simple thing as a big bright viewfinder if they wanted to.

You'll notice they had a lifesize viewfinder then!
I like the big deal the ad makes about the "rapid-wind design" technology. All that consisted of was a lever with about 160 degree throw instead of a dial that had to be wound 110 degrees a few times!
03-12-2016, 02:57 PM   #45
Veteran Member
Tan68's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 396
QuoteOriginally posted by pete-tarmigan Quote
I like the big deal the ad makes about the "rapid-wind design" technology. All that consisted of was a lever with about 160 degree throw instead of a dial that had to be wound 110 degrees a few times!
It remained a big deal for a while...
20 yrs later, my camera was advertised to have two ways to wind: use the entire travel of the lever or use a couple short strokes. I didn't like short stroking it so I typically used the full travel.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
24x36mm, af, brightness, eyepiece, fan, full-frame, image, innovations, k-1, k5, lens, light, lx, pentax, portion, screen, sensor, size, steve, systems, view finder size, viewfinder, viewfinder image, viewfinders
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Size comparison - FA* 24mm cali92rs Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 11-13-2015 05:00 AM
right angle view finder Tony S Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 5 03-09-2015 11:22 AM
Cracked View Finder MrHowell Pentax K-3 3 02-01-2015 09:07 PM
Moire in view finder only and fuzzy look through view finder Indy78 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 13 06-11-2014 11:36 AM
View finder vs Live View on K5 II Wingincamera Pentax K-5 5 12-08-2012 03:47 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:11 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top