On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Oct 1, 2008, at 6:13 PM, Adam Maas wrote: > >> I'd disagree on the R8/R9, I find them to be among the worst handling >> pro SLR's I've tried (the older R's are worse, but really are >> mid-range bodies, not Pro bodies), the RTSIII is much nicer IMHO. > > Matter of opinion for sure. The R8-R9 fits my hands perfectly and I never > needed to even look at a manual to understand every control. I had an RTS > III for a short bit and never got friendly with it.
I'd agree, it's always opinion with this level of camera. > >> The F3 handles very well, but the HP finder is an issue for >> non-glasses wearers when compared to the non-HP or F2 finders and the >> meter readout is awful compared to any of the F2 prisms. > > I wear glasses, I don't care about non-glasses wearers. ;-) Most of the > supposedly wonderful viewfinders ... like the MX and OM-1... have too much > magnification and too little eye relief for glasses wearers. The HP finder > is the *best* viewfinder on any SLR I've own, except for the R8/R9, other > than the fact that it's 100% coverage vs the 97% coverage of the Leica. > > The F3's in-finder meter readout isn't my favorite ... the FM2n's meter > readout remains my favorite of all of my SLRs, just enough info and nothing > more ... but it never really bothered me. > > Again, all a matter of opinion. It's great there are so many good choices > out there. > > Godfrey I agree on the MX and OM-1, not nearly enough eye relief even for non-glasses wearers. The F2 and F3 non-HP finders are about perfect for me. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
