How can you explaint why several posters here who have directly compared the 1970's era MX with the recent *istD and it derivatives found no signifigant differences in brightness or contrast? I think if they are right it's because pentax figured out finders a long long time ago.
jco -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 10:28 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Using a Super Tak w/ istDS The primary changes are in focus screens, especially in how bright the focusing screen can be without losing the ability to discern focus. These have continued to improve, and in fact have gotten distinctly better over the last 5-10 years. Pentax's Natural Bright Matte II screens are excellent, although they could use a little more tooth (which you can get by replacing them with a KatzEye). Compare a stock Nikon FM3a with a FE or FM2n for a good example (These use compatible screens, there is a noticable improvement from the 1978 FE to the FM2n and another to the 2001-era FM3a). Also finder's improved very noticably from the 1950's up until the early 80's, focusing screens nonwithstanding. There were a few rather good early ones like the Nikon F, but even these do not perform as well as later ones. The F3's DE-3 HP finder is arguably the best finder ever put on a 35mm SLR, and that came out in 1983 or so (I'd argue that the LX's FA-1 is a bit better, even if you don't get 100% coverage). The AF era led to a distinct drop in finder quality outside of the 'pro' bodies as manfacturers looked for cost-cutting measures, until semi-pro bodies like the F100 and EOS 3 reintroduced top-quality finders to the not-pro market in the very late 90's. -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: > What "new" technology are you reffering to? > Finders havent changed much since the first coated > prisms of the 1950's because there isnt much there > in the first place to improve. > > Hasnt someone or two just posted that the MX finder is virtually > identical to the Pentax DSLR finders in terms of image quality, only > larger in area? jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of William Robb > Sent: Friday, November 10, 2006 6:49 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: Using a Super Tak w/ istDS > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "J. C. O'Connell" > Subject: RE: Using a Super Tak w/ istDS > > >> Newer cameras dont have magic finders that >> change the laws of physics... > > They often have more efficient finders that take better advantage of > the laws of physics. > > William Robb > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
