I happily use all my manual lenses and I think that the differences
discussed between lenses and betwen digital and analog applications are
overrated - and the words on the "digitally improved" labels that some
lenses now carry are mostly marketing blurb.
What can be said is that comparing lens pe
ks> Yes, you can see the difference - but it isn't big.
I still think that there is a difference how lenses "work" on digital
and film. Just ask about the chromatic aberration on FA 2/24*. I have
seen problems on digital with Tokina ATX 20-35/2.8 which was on film a
fine lens. And there are other
--- Frantisek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Still, I would say
> IstD/IstDS (I believe DS has the same finder?) are quite
usable
> at manual focus, unlike many other DSLRs. "Usable" for me is
> manual focusing at low contrast low light levels like in a
bar.
> On the D100 & D70, I can't accurately fo
GD> The D/DS have an excellent viewfinder for manual focus. I can
GD> see the critical focus point even with the A24/2.8 or the
I certainly agree! It was quite something to see the trough the finder
of it. Still, I tried the LX just alongside, with the new screen, so
the comparison LX is like big
LX+SE-60 is the best SLR finder
> ever!
>
I agree. I have that screen in my LX. It's certainly the best SLR finder I've
ever seen, although I admit I haven't seen them all. Unfortunately, I rarely
shoot with it any more, but I pick it up and admire it from time to time.
Paul
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AW: Manual Focus Pentax Glass on istD
LX+SE-60 is the best SLR finder
ever!
I agree. I have that screen in my LX. It's certainly the best SLR
finder I've ever seen, although I admit I haven't seen them a
On 22 Feb 2005 at 1:43, Frantisek wrote:
> I certainly agree! It was quite something to see the trough the finder
> of it. Still, I tried the LX just alongside, with the new screen, so
> the comparison LX is like big apples to small oranges ;-) I was just
> again impressed with LX's finder (I own
I don't have an LX, but love the viewfinder in my MXs.
I wonder how much would a DSLR with a viewfinder that is as bright and
big as that cost?
j
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 13:44:12 +1000, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 22 Feb 2005 at 1:43, Frantisek wrote:
>
> > I certainly agree! It w
- Original Message -
From: "Juan Buhler"
Subject: Re: AW: Manual Focus Pentax Glass on istD
I don't have an LX, but love the viewfinder in my MXs.
I wonder how much would a DSLR with a viewfinder that is as bright
and
big as that cost?
US$14,000.
(I'm making this up)
William Robb
In engineering parlance you "...pulled it out of your a**..."
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Juan Buhler"
Subject: Re: AW: Manual Focus Pentax Glass on istD
I don't have an LX, but love the viewfinder in my MXs.
I wonder how much would a DSLR wit
Juan Buhler mused:
>
> I don't have an LX, but love the viewfinder in my MXs.
>
> I wonder how much would a DSLR with a viewfinder that is as bright and
> big as that cost?
>
> j
MX:0.97 magnification, 95% coverage.
ME Super: 0.95 magnification, 92% coverage.
*ist-D:0.95 magnific
--- Juan Buhler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't have an LX, but love the viewfinder in my MXs.
>
> I wonder how much would a DSLR with a viewfinder that is as
> bright and big as that one
SLR finder brightness is ultimately limited by the size of the
focusing screen, so to get a 24x36mm focu
To:
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 12:07 AM
Subject: Re: AW: Manual Focus Pentax Glass on istD
Juan Buhler mused:
I don't have an LX, but love the viewfinder in my MXs.
I wonder how much would a DSLR with a viewfinder that is as bright and
big as that cost?
j
MX:0.97 magnific
Tuesday, February 22, 2005, 7:35:52 PM, Phil wrote:
PM> re Magnification data for a few Nikons
PM> F6 Magnification 74% with 50mm lens at infinity (F5 70%, F80 75%, F100
PM> 76%,F4 70%, F3 80% (with HP 75%)) The F6,F5,F4,F3,F2 and F all have 100%
PM> viewfinder coverage
PM> The best part is t
e 3
or 4 Leica owners to rescue the firm. Most Leica owners seem to have an
adequate amount of funds. Friendly, and envious dig!
- Original Message -
From: "Frantisek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Phil McOrmond"
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: A
15 matches
Mail list logo
