Rangefinders are an option, but every SLR I've ever owned (excluding those with auto-focusing) have had split-rangefinders in the middle of a fresnel donut. True, they are only useful with lenses faster than f5.6 or so, but most of my lenses meet that criterion.
Yes, I also find split-image focusing screens in SLRs the easiest to focus with. I used them in my OM-1’s and they are available for a number of other brands (e.g., Nikon F).
For the Olympus Pen F/FT, however, split-image is not an option and focusing them can be hard, as Patrick Robert James noted above. There is a repair shop in Japan (Kanto Camera, http://www.kantocamera.com/english/repair/olympus/index.html) that advertised replacing the standard Pen F/FT screen with a split-image screen, but it looks like they no longer do that. Replacing the semi-silvered mirror in an FT to get a brighter view finder is relatively easy if you are willing to loose the meter (I have done that myself), but getting the focusing screen out requires major disassembly, so I have not attempted changing the focusing screen.
I have found the split image focusing are seriously lacking when I use lenses with smaller apertures which cause one side or the other or both sides of the split image or grid to go dark rendering the split image or grid useless.
With lenses that slow, accurate focusing isn't that critical anyway, thanks to the increased DOF of the lens.
A largely unknown benefit of the split-rangefinder "spot", is that if either side of the rangefinder "blacks-out", that probably means your eye is not dead center in the viewfinder -- where it should be anyway. Move the camera (or your eyeball) up and down and side-to-side and the "black-out" will disappear -- assuming the lens is fast enough (usually faster than f5.6). The closer the lens is to f5.6 the more helpful this "trick" will be.
I've been wearing trifocals for years but finding what I really want are lenses that are ground for distance and middle distance. Often when trying to find the rangefinder patch in dim light, it's too far away for the close distance, the far distance is too far and the narrow band of middle distance is too narrow and I have to tilt my head back a bit to make it work.
Yes, however some of my lenses are f/8 and no variation of the eye position will work. Therefore I have removed split image and microprisms from my viewfinders.
Sounds like the glasses that are optimized for working on a computer
Personally for me, "odd" is an understatement. F70 is probably one and only Nikon, whose menu left me wondering, if engineers were high on some substance when designing the camera. May I suggest Nikon F-801 and/or F90 instead? They are not as lightweight as F70, but they have conventional interface, run on AA batteries and are compatible with AI lenses in aperture priority and manual exposure modes.Perhaps I should have purchased a Nikon F70 with it's odd interface that offers light weight with backwards compatibility?
I'm not sure about that. I mean, if shooting slides, 1/3 stop increments would definitely give better result, but with the flexibility of modern color and monochrome negative films, 1/2 stop is more than adequate, especially considering how many other variables are introduced when scanning, or even when doing a darkroom print.I should add.
The newer film Nikons in AP mode offer shutter speeds in 1/3 stops perhaps this is why the images look good?
I've been wearing trifocals for years but finding what I really want are lenses that are ground for distance and middle distance. Often when trying to find the rangefinder patch in dim light, it's too far away for the close distance, the far distance is too far and the narrow band of middle distance is too narrow and I have to tilt my head back a bit to make it work.
All you need are progressives. Talk to your optician or optometrist.
My prescription is progressive.
Mine also. They aren't the magic bullet some might think them to be.
While I'm only on the far side of my thirties, I've been near-sighted since my teens and so has everyone in my immediate family. This has bothered me enough to get ICL surgery and it's been nothing short of a revelation. I can finally use any camera I like and some of those squinty viewfinders seem generous enough now.
I'm already a bit more far-sighted after the surgery and this trend will continue but chances are I'll never need anything other than reading glasses ever again.
That being said, I find rangefinders the easiest to focus cameras by far.
I've been wearing trifocals for years but finding what I really want are lenses that are ground for distance and middle distance.
My prescription is progressive.
I'm looking through them right now. No breaks or lines between distance, mid or close up. I want to drop the close on one pair with more mid and distance to use with my camera. My prescription is quite strong and adjust for astigmatism. I tried contact lenses but didn't like them.That doesn't sound like progressives to me. Your prescription might say progressive, but that doesn't mean they were made that way. You can visually tell if you have tri-focals or progressives.
I want to drop the close on one pair with more mid and distance to use with my camera.
I never thought about that -- a set of specs just for my camera. Close (for the camera) & far with no inbetween -- just bi-focals. I donated my old pair a long time ago, so I can't check that out -- but a good idea????
Having had my eyes fixed with lasik in my 30s I now, 20 years later, find myself wearing reading glasses 80% of the time. Unfortunately I find I've forgotten them more often than not when I go out to take pictures with my large format systems.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?