Yes, I understand what you are saying.
I guess my real question is.....Why this camera, why the F3.?
What about the cameras that came before and after. I do not see it addressed with any other camera.
So the newer F series camera all have high eye point viewfinder.
If by newer you mean the autofocus types then it doesn't really matter much to people who prefer large magnification (less eye relief) for better critical focus since the AF addresses that.
The Pentax LX has the most variations of viewfinders with magnifications ranging from a minimum of 0.55X to greater then lifesize at 1.35X depending on the prism used.
I have always heard that the HP was designed to accommodate people (photographers I suppose) that wore glasses.
1. Is that true.?
2. I do not think I have "ever" heard this applied to any other camera, not before or since. I sure could be wrong, I am new to photography.
But.....I do not recall the Canon A-1 or F-1 having a camera variant that was made for eye glasses. I do not recall the Nikon F2 or F4 trying to address the "problem" of shooters that had to use glasses.
Am I right...why was Nikon concerned about this with the F3.?
Thank You
Yes, while the F3 had the HP head Canon and Pentax offered action finder with even more eye relief and smaller magnification. Also their viewfinders can be rotated and they are more flexible than the plain HP prism.
. I do not think I have "ever" heard this applied to any other camera, not before or since. I sure could be wrong, I am new to photography.
But.....I do not recall the Canon A-1 or F-1 having a camera variant that was made for eye glasses. I do not recall the Nikon F2 or F4 trying to address the "problem" of shooters that had to use glasses.
As mentioned by cuthbert, both Canon and Pentax offered "sports finders", in particular the one on the Canon has way way way way higher eyepoint than the one in the F3. But of course it is bigger.
The F3 does have an Action Finder, called the DA-2. I have one and it is terrific if you are wearing a motorcycle helmet, or safety goggles in an industrial setting, which is why I purchased that finder. You can see virtually the entire viewfinder image with your eye about 60-70mm away. I have used my DA-2 finder underground in mines wearing thick goggles, sitting backwards on motorcycles wearing a helmet, through an arc welding helmet waiting for an arc to be struck before I could see anything, (one of the hardest things I have ever tried to shoot, until we set the camera up then I waited until the welding rod passed in front the viewfinder).
A very large viewfinder that enables you to see the image from a relatively great distance, has a distinct advantage over a normal viewfinder in many instances.
Mick.
I bought my F3 before the HP finder was introduced, and later bought an HP finder. I didn't notice much difference, but with the HP you don't have to move your eye around quite as much to see everything wearing glasses.
Maybe it will be an excuse to buy another F3 body so I can do a side by side comparison.
This one?
It looks like it's fixed, and a little too bulky for my taste. I think that Canon's:
And Pentax's:
Are more useful and elegant.
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?