First "true" digital rangefinder camera

On Sun, 01 Mar 2015 11:46:08 -0500, PeterN
wrote:

On 2/28/2015 11:58 PM, Bill W wrote:
On Sat, 28 Feb 2015 23:14:10 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

Here's a copmpany that wass a leaer in that field. Unfortunately for
them, not everybody agreew with you.
Yes, the above is my interpretation of their change i business policy.

http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/page--Custom-Focusing-Screens--store.html

I've been long aware of them but I did not realise their business had
dropped off as much as their website suggests. A great pity but not
really surprising. They made very good stuff.

business dropped off because live view is so much better.

Battery life, bright sunlight, and the fact that most of us are not
comfortable holding the camera that way would seem to be the biggest
drawbacks, but I agree with you overall. This thread did get me
looking into those split ring screens (again), but I see now that some
screens work well with fast lenses, but not slow ones, and the other
way around. And it would be easy to run the Katzeye up to $200. It's
just not worth it. And even though my Pentax only goes to 10x
magnification in LV, it's still probably much better than using a
split ring.

Many cameras have cocus conformation, which elimiiates the need for a
split ring.

Focus confirmation only confirms that the camera thinks that it has
focussed on something. It doesn't confirm that it has focussed on the
right something.


Once again, I am glad I stumbled across this group.

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 01 Mar 2015 11:58:41 -0500, PeterN
wrote:

On 3/1/2015 12:35 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Sat, 28 Feb 2015 23:14:10 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

Here's a copmpany that wass a leaer in that field. Unfortunately for
them, not everybody agreew with you.
Yes, the above is my interpretation of their change i business policy.

http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/page--Custom-Focusing-Screens--store.html

I've been long aware of them but I did not realise their business had
dropped off as much as their website suggests. A great pity but not
really surprising. They made very good stuff.

business dropped off because live view is so much better.

That, to me, is just your opinion as a generality. When you get to
specifics - portraits, macro, and landscapes - live view is definitely
better. With live view, especially on a tripod, you can kinda stand
back and take in the whole scene.

I don't agree that it's better, or even as good, when the subject is
moving.

Given the choice of shooting a sports event with live view or a
split-image focus screen, I'd opt for split-image.

I don't think you can be as reactive using live view as you can using
viewfinder with a split-image focus.

Not that I want to add a split-image focus screen. The red square is
fine.

I do not like LV for macro work. I have tried it, but, as I said
earlier, have a strong preference for OV.

Agreed. And any thing else where exact focussing on a particular
detail is required.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


Many cameras have cocus conformation, which elimiiates the need for a
split ring.

Focus confirmation only confirms that the camera thinks that it has
focussed on something. It doesn't confirm that it has focussed on the
right something.

it does when you put the focus point on the item on which you want to
be in focus. same for a split-image screen.

in other words, learn how to use it properly.

On 2/28/2015 11:19 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:

heavily edited for brevity

Today was overcast and with misty rain. The screen on my camera was
so covered with raindrops that I couldn't even view the shot I'd just
taken.

edited

Weather-resistant DSLR's are available; Pentax even includes it on some
of its entry-level models.

John

On 2015-03-01 23:35:46 +0000, John Turco said:

On 2/28/2015 11:19 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:

heavily edited for brevity

Today was overcast and with misty rain. The screen on my camera was
so covered with raindrops that I couldn't even view the shot I'd just
taken.

edited

Weather-resistant DSLR's are available; Pentax even includes it on some
of its entry-level models.

John

I don't think weather resistance was the problem with Tony's D300, just
the ability to use a rain splattered LV screen. It doesnt really matter
how weather resistant the camera is if you can't see what you are
shooting through the rain drops on the LCD.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sun, 01 Mar 2015 18:03:19 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


Many cameras have cocus conformation, which elimiiates the need for a
split ring.

Focus confirmation only confirms that the camera thinks that it has
focussed on something. It doesn't confirm that it has focussed on the
right something.

it does when you put the focus point on the item on which you want to
be in focus. same for a split-image screen.

in other words, learn how to use it properly.

There are occasions when the focus mechanism works with an area larger
than the area which is the key point of the photograph. Please don't
tell me that live view will deal with that. It generally won't.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , nospam wrote:

Sandman:
Nah, this I don't agree with at all. Your hand is already there,
and I've never in my life felt that adjusting the aperture ring
was unergonomic. I have rather large hands though, so that may be
a factor.

not always, and the line length in your newsreader is too long.

for some lenses, such as longer lenses, your hand is where it
balances, which is not normally where the aperture ring is. often,
it's going to be on the zoom ring.

meanwhile, your fingers are already where the control wheels are.

Not if I have the index finger on the shutter button, or my thumb on the AE-L
button. There are circumstances where your finger/hand isn't exactly right, and
your left hand is usually (with AF-lenses) free, so...

nospam:
less accurate

Sandman:
How could it possibly be less accurate? Both the dial and the
aperture ring has discrete clicks for each step. The ring has the
added benefit of having end stops so if you have a f1.4 lens and
want to set it to f2, it's usually a full turn to the stop and
then one click back. Both intuitive and quick.

aperture rings are either 1 stop clicks or 1/2 stop clicks,
depending on the lens. there's also a small amount of mechanical
play.

control wheels are 1/3 stop (or optionally 1/2 stop), but it
actually can be anything. for instance, if you have the camera in
shutter priority and if f/5.3978 or f/8.222 is what's needed, that's
what you get, just as you would get 1/297th or 1/108th second if you
have the camera pick the shutter speed.

I've never ever owned a camera that shoots in f/8.222 when in shutter priority.
Also, you're describing an automatic setting, not higher accuracy due to the
control input.

nospam:
a control wheel fixes all of those shortcomings.

Sandman:
Well, some of them at least.

all of them

In your highly personal opinion, which I for obvious reason doesn't agree with
100%.

nospam:
plus, recent lenses don't even have aperture rings.

Sandman:
Indeed, which is something of a bitch when using them on an
adapter, i.e. you have to make sure to get the right adapter that
has an aperture ring on it.

adapters generally suck because of all the compromises made.

They are generally awesome since you can use more lenses with the same body.
Really nice.

--
Sandman

In article , Alfred Molon wrote:

In article
, Sandman
says...

Sandman:
On a SLR, using live view for focusing is a very cumbersome
process, where you have to remove the camera from your eye, press
a live view button, then use the magnifying button to zoom in on
the live view, all the while holding a heavy camera with maybe a
heavy lens almost at arms length.

Depends on which SLR you are using. Some SLRs switch automatically
between (electronic) viewfinder and the LCD screen. Also the
magnifying button can be easy to operate, depending on the camera
model.

Which SLR's do this?

--
Sandman

In article , nospam wrote:

Eric Stevens:
Not so. It hasn't got the acuity.

nospam:
nonsense. it has far, far more acuity than ground glass ever
could, especially with a hidpi display and because it can be
zoomed. it's no contest. it's in another league entirely.

Eric Stevens:
I had that 12 years ago in the old Sony F707 and I didn't like it.
You could either see the whole frame or you could see whether or
not it was in focus. You couldn't do both at the same time.

a lot has changed since then.

Not by much in this aspect, though. Even the latest and greatest LCD screens and
EVF still allow for either framing or focusing, you can't do both at the same
time and expect perfect focusing. Plus, most SLR's have pretty poor LCD's, at
least when compared to high end mirrorless, but even with the mirrorless cameras,
focus peaking is required to do any focusing when zoomed out mode.

--
Sandman

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

Many cameras have cocus conformation, which elimiiates the need for a
split ring.

Focus confirmation only confirms that the camera thinks that it has
focussed on something. It doesn't confirm that it has focussed on the
right something.

it does when you put the focus point on the item on which you want to
be in focus. same for a split-image screen.

in other words, learn how to use it properly.

There are occasions when the focus mechanism works with an area larger
than the area which is the key point of the photograph. Please don't
tell me that live view will deal with that. It generally won't.

there are edge cases in everything.

a split-prism won't work in every situation either, and actually it
will work in fewer situations than live view does.