Re: Eyepoint
Rob Studdert wrote: On 13 Feb 2001, at 14:05, Wieland Willker wrote: > Alexander Krohe wrote: > > Speaking about the MX, this distance is definitely too > > short. The viewing distance of the aperture indication > > is way too short. > > > What is too short? I don't understand this. Should it be farther away? Why? I can >see and > read it perfectly. Wieland, Alexander has a problem with the apparent distance of the aperture indicators through the finder, I would assume that you don't find it uncomfortable at all, maybe you are a bit short sighted and Alexander is a little long sighted :-) Its all to do with comfort, the apparent viewing distance can be critical in this area, it is not a function of eye-point as such. -- MY REPLY: Exactly. Thanks for clarifying. BTW the viewfinders of the LX, K-Series and the MZ cameras don't cause similar problems to me (except that the viewfinder indications of the MZ's are too small). I think the FE-1 viewfinder of the LX is the best viewfinder of all Pentax cameras, both in terms of relaxed viewing and of precise focusing. Enjoy, Alexander __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Eyepoint
On 13 Feb 2001, at 14:05, Wieland Willker wrote: > Alexander Krohe wrote: > > Speaking about the MX, this distance is definitely too > > short. The viewing distance of the aperture indication > > is way too short. > > What is too short? I don't understand this. Should it be farther away? Why? I can >see and > read it perfectly. Wieland, Alexander has a problem with the apparent distance of the aperture indicators through the finder, I would assume that you don't find it uncomfortable at all, maybe you are a bit short sighted and Alexander is a little long sighted :-) Its all to do with comfort, the apparent viewing distance can be critical in this area, it is not a function of eye-point as such. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 Fax +61-2-9554-9259 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Eyepoint
Alexander Krohe wrote: > Speaking about the MX, this distance is definitely too > short. The viewing distance of the aperture indication > is way too short. What is too short? I don't understand this. Should it be farther away? Why? I can see and read it perfectly. > People on this list tend to be very uncritical about > cameras or lenses that they are in love with, I am not in love with the MX. I use several as workhorses. They are good. I am not uncritical. But maybe I just haven't seen enough different viewfinders to understand what you mean. I have seen the MZ series and they are worse. I can only say that I wear glasses and I have absolutely no problem with the MX viewfinder, so I was quite surprised to read this. Best wishes Wieland - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Eyepoint
Weiland wrote: --- "I am wearing glasses, and I have ABSOLUTELY NO problem with the MX viewfinder. I can see the aperture very easily. And everything else. Either you folks have a different MX, or never had an MX or you have very different glasses. :-) Best wishes Wieland --- Hi Wieland, I don't know which posting you are referring to, but or my part: I didn't wrote about eyepoint I wrote about the "viewing distance" to the screen. That meant the distance, the eye has to adjust when looking at the screen. If this is too short, the eyes will get tiered soon when continually looking to the viewfinder. (In contrast is "the eyepoint, or eye relief, indicates how far your eye can be from the viewfinder to see the entire image" -- see posting from Erwin Vereecken) Speaking about the MX, this distance is definitely too short. The viewing distance of the aperture indication is way too short. People on this list tend to be very uncritical about cameras or lenses that they are in love with, - in particular when it comes to those vintage gear :) ... I like the MX too but it has definitely shortcomings (no wonder it's 25 years old design). One of them this the viewfinder. Alexander __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
