Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-20-2020, 09:02 PM   #16
New Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Centennial, Colorado
Posts: 17
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by mikesbike Quote
I was looking around the room reading everything, wall charts and signs, print up close to me, and.... even at mid-distance, the words on his equipment! He just sat with a big smile, saying this is very impressive, even better than he himself expected.
...
My doctor said not everyone with myopia is a candidate for this approach for cataract removal corrective implants. In my case, myopia was not very great in severity, being that I had been quite able to read without glasses, so I am fortunate. I thought I would put my experience out there as a possibility to discuss with your doctor, if applicable, as well as for anyone else interested.
Thanks @mikesbike for sharing your experience. I am glad that your procedure was a success for both you and your mom. My last visit to ophthalmologist was in August and he did not mention about cataract but typical fog due to age. I am farsighted, also need more light to read things, read camera buttons/dials and looking through viewfinder


Viewfinder diopter and auto focusing are godsend for me. Thing that I really really want is face detection and Pentax dont have it other than in LV. But for LV I have to use reading glasses and its hassle going back and forth between with-reading-glasses and without. I hope someone is listening and consider these things for future products.

Thank you for sharing


Last edited by fazalabbas; 12-20-2020 at 09:08 PM.
12-20-2020, 11:07 PM - 1 Like   #17
Veteran Member
Belcik's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Russia,Moscow
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 347
QuoteOriginally posted by mikesbike Quote
Welcome to the forum! Yes, the EVF can provide better viewing brightness in lower light conditions than an OVF. This can be useful. However, as you know, it is not an accurate representation. It really does not show what you are likely to get from your shot- it is an artificial enhancement. So just be careful in your metering based on that. You will learn the difference when downloading the results and viewing on your monitor, and even a greater difference when making a print. Experience teaches, so you can take that enhancement into account.

But the same is true when using a DSLR's rear screen for viewing, especially when using LV for your shots instead of the OVF. The newer Pentax camera models provide a significantly better LV experience than do older models, which might be a good alternative to use in your case when dealing with reduced lighting situations.

You mention your eyesight as you get older. Perhaps you are developing cataracts. Only by consulting an ophthalmologist, not an optician, will you know for sure. I go to one who does surgery, but does not push it until intervention is the best option. He has been my eye doctor for over 25 years, and is a highly-regarded surgeon. I finally had mine removed 7 years ago for my right eye, the worst one while the right eye was still vision-correctable with glasses. Then three years later for the right eye. The most stunning revelation for me when the first eye was done, was the considerable improvement in brightness of the viewed scene compared to the right eye, which was not yet done. So there's no telling how many years I had gone, having reduced brightness of my viewing due to advancing cataracts, even though my visual acuity was still being corrected by wearing glasses. I had been wearing glasses because of myopia (near-sightedness) since my teen years.

Another important revelation (in my case) was that since now my left eye was corrected, via the lens implant, for distant-viewing so I no longer needed much in the way of glasses, except for corrective bifocals for seeing up close and reading. (I began requiring bifocals when I was about 52 years old.) But if not needing the glasses for all-around vision including distance, I could still see fine up close without glasses, not even needing the bifocals- but that ability disappeared with the new lens implant correcting for distance. I had considered the more expensive multi-focal lens implant, but upon asking my doctor abut any possible downside, he said ghosting of lights at nighttime could be a factor in some cases, so I chose to resign myself to needing bifocals whenever having to see up close. However, since the right eye was not yet done, I could still see up close using no glasses with it! I found that between the differences each eye now provided, I was able to see both far distance and up close with no glasses! I could go swimming at the beach and see the location of my things while still in the water, yet I could also pick something up and examine it up close! I could drive without glasses, though I had a new pair ordered with my updated prescription. The only issue was the middle-range vision, which neither eye was well-suited for. Using the computer was problematic. This had been an age-old issue for me anyway, but now was worse.

But a light bulb went on in my head, as I now had new functional capability. 3 years later, when it was time to address the cataract in my right eye, I requested a special consultation to talk about a different approach for it. I knew my mother had decided to remain nearsighted when she had her cataracts removed and lenses implanted, because she wanted to still be able to read without glasses. This was successful, and she was satisfied, being already used to wearing glasses for seeing distance. We had our consolation in his office, where I explained my idea- to have my right eye remain near-sighted, so each eye would fill in the weakness of the other. He said in my case this is a plausible solution, but he also said the cataract causes myopia to be more severe, that now I had to hold reading material much closer up than I used to. That he wanted less descrepency between the two eyes. Therefore, he looked in his computer to find my old records of prescriptions going back some 15-20 years- before cataracts were part of my condition. He said he would designate an implant lens that would correct to being along the lines of a much older prescription. Once he had that information, he calculated the exact focus point in inches as it would be when implanted, probably the DOF as well. When my vision cleared the day after the operation, I went to my post-op appointment, which began with a quick vision exam by his technical assistant. Wow! Could I see- like I had not since I was a kid! I read the print card, then the wall charts, like nothing! Using both eyes, of course. When the doc came in, I was raving. I was looking around the room reading everything, wall charts and signs, print up close to me, and.... even at mid-distance, the words on his equipment! He just sat with a big smile, saying this is very impressive, even better than he himself expected.

I came back after several weeks, allowing my eyes to settle in, to get testing for my new glasses prescription, which of course is quite different for each eye. The bifocals are hardly anything for the right and quite strong for the left. But now at the computer I am perfectly fine using no glasses at all. The middle range is fine- for the first time since having a computer! My viewing through the OVF is better than it has ever been, with or without glasses! And I use none, via the right eye, and little if any departure from default OVF diopter correction.

it is interesting that even though my eyes are so different in one being good for closer, and the other for farther distance, there is no awareness of this difference, that each eye is doing something different. The brain is what puts together the image. If the detail is present, regardless of which eye presents that detail, it will fill in that detail across the whole visual field, as long as both eyes are being used, and with full stereo vision!. My glasses are now of a weak prescription. Even weaker for the right eye, which only needs some correction for distance, while the left eye needs it for farther and closer mid-range, and the stronger bifocal for up close. So when wearing glasses, these to fine tune the eyes together, it is somewhat better all-around, but not always, as my ditching them at the computer reveals.

My doctor said not everyone with myopia is a candidate for this approach for cataract removal corrective implants. In my case, myopia was not very great in severity, being that I had been quite able to read without glasses, so I am fortunate. I thought I would put my experience out there as a possibility to discuss with your doctor, if applicable, as well as for anyone else interested.
Wow... does it mean that you have no DOF? you see everything sharp enough at all distance ?

---------- Post added 2020-12-21 at 09:10 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by fazalabbas Quote
Due to aging eyes, focusing and looking through viewfinder is not at its best. Recently I tested and bought Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III kit, consumer entry level DSLR camera. The viewfinder was outstanding, very very clear and bright. Now whenever I reach for camera to take pic, I pick Olympus. I also like Olympus image stabilization better but thats a discussion for some other time


I currently have KX, K50 and two K5.


Question 1: Considering my Pentax bodies are older, Pentax bodies are SLRs where as Olympus is mirrorless. I like to understand/know that the dull viewfinders of Pentax bodies are because of older prisms? age? or its not as bright as Olympus because of mirrorless vs SLR?
Question 2: Which Pentax SLR APS-C has brightest viewfinder?
Maybe this does some help? Pentax O-ME53 Magnifying Eyecup 30150 B&H Photo Video
12-21-2020, 01:41 AM - 1 Like   #18
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2013
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posts: 674
According to the reports, the next Pentax APS-C DSLR (K-3 Mark III) will have a new and noticeably brighter OVF, but would the brightness differences between existing recent Pentax pentaprism viewfinders (K-5/K-3/K-50/K-70/KP) even be descernible? Presumably the best way to get a brighter OVF view is to use lenses with the largest maximum apertures that you are able to afford? E.g. An f/2.8 lens will give a significanly brighter view than will an f/4 lens.

Philip
12-21-2020, 02:20 AM - 1 Like   #19
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,602
QuoteOriginally posted by Belcik Quote
I use a similar magnifier (the Tenpa one) but magnification doesnít make the viewfinder brighter: it makes it dimmer. However, if you prefer a larger view, then the slightly dimmer view might be overlooked.

The only addition that Iíve seen with a credible claim to increased viewfinder brightness is to change the focussing screen for one that has lower light loss through diffusion.

12-22-2020, 08:09 PM   #20
New Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Centennial, Colorado
Posts: 17
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by RobA_Oz Quote
I use a similar magnifier (the Tenpa one) but magnification doesn’t make the viewfinder brighter: it makes it dimmer. However, if you prefer a larger view, then the slightly dimmer view might be overlooked.
It might brighten things if the plastics used in this one is clearer than stock. But I dont have experience.

QuoteOriginally posted by RobA_Oz Quote
The only addition that I’ve seen with a credible claim to increased viewfinder brightness is to change the focussing screen for one that has lower light loss through diffusion.
So this is the point 2 for making view brighter.

Thanks

---------- Post added 12-22-20 at 08:26 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by MrB1 Quote
According to the reports, the next Pentax APS-C DSLR (K-3 Mark III) will have a new and noticeably brighter OVF, but would the brightness differences between existing recent Pentax pentaprism viewfinders (K-5/K-3/K-50/K-70/KP) even be descernible? Presumably the best way to get a brighter OVF view is to use lenses with the largest maximum apertures that you are able to afford? E.g. An f/2.8 lens will give a significanly brighter view than will an f/4 lens.

Philip
This is a good point, using faster lenses

Thanks

---------- Post added 12-22-20 at 08:56 PM ----------

Pentax just popped my balloon (((. Just found out that K3-iii price will be around US$ 2,000. I was saving money for this flagship one but seems like I cut short my saving and buy KP instead
Hope KP has good viewfinder

Last edited by fazalabbas; 12-22-2020 at 08:23 PM.
12-23-2020, 12:13 PM   #21
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 13,806
QuoteOriginally posted by fazalabbas Quote
It might brighten things if the plastics used in this one is clearer than stock. But I dont have experience.
Since you don't replace any of the viewfinder optics, but stick a magnifier to it, that can only make the image slightly darker.

The K-3 Mark III managed to get both a higher magnification and a brighter viewfinder through a complete redesign, including using - first in a camera - a high refraction glass pentaprism.
If they simply tweaked the eyepiece optics, they would have got a dimmer viewfinder, too.
12-23-2020, 01:01 PM   #22
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 39,553
QuoteOriginally posted by fazalabbas Quote
Pentax just popped my balloon (((. Just found out that K3-iii price will be around US$ 2,000.
Consider the source for that price estimate.


Steve
12-23-2020, 01:14 PM - 1 Like   #23
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 39,553
One thing that has not been mentioned on this thread is that brighter is not the same as better. The stock focus screen shared by all recent APS-C models is quite bright, but to the detriment of focus sensitivity for use with manual focus technique. I asked Rachael Katz (former owner of Katzeye) about that in regards to the Optibrite treatment offered on their products and she confirmed a slight loss in the ability to detect OOF* in the matte field due to the treatment. My estimate of the stock screen for my K-3 is that the ability to attain best focus at f/3.5 aperture and wider is a little better than the PDAF system and no better with an f/1.4 lens than with an f/3.5 lens.


* Essentially, exaggerated DOF making fine focus more difficult using that portion of the screen.

12-23-2020, 03:45 PM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 3,062
QuoteOriginally posted by Belcik Quote
Wow... does it mean that you have no DOF? you see everything sharp enough at all distance ?
I have better DOF than since I was a kid. Stereo vision. Both eyes will see, each its own angle of view which is normal , but one sees detail better than the other depending on distance. However, the brain has the detail as supplied by one eye or the other, and fills in that detail for both eyes over the entire visual field as long as both eyes are being used. Yes, now I see well at all distances without glasses. My glasses now make some distances just a little better, but not always. At some distances I am better without them. My viewing through a good VF has been great- without glasses. A big change there. This means, now I just put my glasses away when shooting pictures, because I see great through the VF, and still good when looking around.
12-23-2020, 10:20 PM   #25
Veteran Member
Belcik's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Russia,Moscow
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 347
QuoteOriginally posted by mikesbike Quote
I have better DOF than since I was a kid. Stereo vision. Both eyes will see, each its own angle of view which is normal , but one sees detail better than the other depending on distance. However, the brain has the detail as supplied by one eye or the other, and fills in that detail for both eyes over the entire visual field as long as both eyes are being used. Yes, now I see well at all distances without glasses. My glasses now make some distances just a little better, but not always. At some distances I am better without them. My viewing through a good VF has been great- without glasses. A big change there. This means, now I just put my glasses away when shooting pictures, because I see great through the VF, and still good when looking around.

Sounds like a Photographer Superpower


Отправлено с моего iPhone используя Tapatalk
02-14-2021, 05:58 AM   #26
Pentaxian
angerdan's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,810
QuoteOriginally posted by fazalabbas Quote
  1. I like to understand/know that the dull viewfinders of Pentax bodies are because of older prisms?
    age?
    or its not as bright as Olympus because of mirrorless vs SLR?
  2. Which Pentax SLR APS-C has brightest viewfinder?
  1. How exactly do you specifiy "dull" regarding an OVF?
    Prisms usually don't age.
    Comparing viewfinder brighness between OVF and EVF is like comparing apples and oranges (and saying that apples aren't as orange as an orange).
  2. Maybe the one with the smallest magnification. Of course it also depends on the mounted lens, so the D FA* 50mm f1.4 will offer a much brighter viewfinder image than the 18-55mm kit lens.


QuoteOriginally posted by fazalabbas Quote
Thing that I really really want is face detection and Pentax dont have it other than in LV. I hope someone is listening and consider these things for future products.
Since Nikon offers 3D-Tracking Face-Detection during PDAFwith an light metering sensor which has a lower resolution then the one in the new K-3 III, we can just hope and wait if face detection will be available with Pentax during viewfinder use.


QuoteOriginally posted by fazalabbas Quote
Just found out that K3-iii price will be around US$ 2,000.
That's wether confirmed than probably to be happen. You can expect a street price below $2,000:

QuoteOriginally posted by ThorSanchez Quote
200,000• does not necessarily equal $1900. Currently on the Ricoh Japan site the DFA* 85mm is listed at 248,000•. At B&H it goes for $1700. The GRIII is officially 123,750•, at B&H it's currently $896.

Using about 140• to the dollar, that would make 200,000• equal to about $1429. For the K-3iii to be more than $1900 in the US it would need to be priced at over 266,000•.
Check out the Thread about the Price for the K-3 III:
How much will the K-3 III cost? - PentaxForums.com

Last edited by angerdan; 02-14-2021 at 06:43 AM.
02-14-2021, 07:43 PM   #27
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 18,661
QuoteOriginally posted by fazalabbas Quote
Due to aging eyes, focusing and looking through viewfinder is not at its best. Recently I tested and bought Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III kit, consumer entry level DSLR camera. The viewfinder was outstanding, very very clear and bright. Now whenever I reach for camera to take pic, I pick Olympus. I also like Olympus image stabilization better but thats a discussion for some other time


I currently have KX, K50 and two K5.


Question 1: Considering my Pentax bodies are older, Pentax bodies are SLRs where as Olympus is mirrorless. I like to understand/know that the dull viewfinders of Pentax bodies are because of older prisms? age? or its not as bright as Olympus because of mirrorless vs SLR?
Question 2: Which Pentax SLR APS-C has brightest viewfinder?

Optical finders that are apsc are less bright than full frame generally. Some older apsc cameras were also equipped with a pentamirror rather than a pentaprism the pentamirror is not as bright. I know the k-5 has a pentaprism.

EVF finders can be made brighter just be turning up the gain. The dynamic range and color accuracy of the EVF suffer when the EVF is turned up. So while it may be brighter it might be a lot less accurate than the optical finder.

The new k-3iii is expected to have a very bright finder. However the brightest optical Pentax finder should be found in the k-1 as far as I know.
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!
bodies, brightness, camera, computer, distance, dslr, eye, eyes, glasses, lens, lenses, mirrorless, myopia, olympus, ovf, pentax, photography, pm, thanks, view, viewfinder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
IQ of FF vs APS-C primes on APS-C bodies lightbox Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 26 11-10-2016 06:50 PM
When is an APS-C lens not really an APS-C? lightbox Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 03-27-2015 07:45 PM
K200D viewfinder + Katzeye VS. K20D viewfinder dugrant153 Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 07-24-2009 11:36 AM
Brightest Focusing Screen for MX? baltochef920 Pentax Film SLR Discussion 8 09-14-2008 05:17 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:48 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