Some thoughts about finders...
I have always been dazzled by the ease of focus and contrast of the finder
in my 4T. I don't doubt that much of that is attributable to the qualtity
of the Zuikos that go in front of it, but I have a hunch that the optics of
the finder itself - the size and quality of the prism, the viewfinder lens,
the texture of the focus screen, etc. - are fairly special. Sadly, when I
recently acquired my first back-up body, an old OM-1 MD, I discovered that
OM viewfinders have indeed come a long way. With an OM-1, apparently, your
pupil can't deviate from dead-center of the viewfinder while focusing. If
it does, focusing becomes a bit of a crap shoot (with non-aid style
screens, that is). And even then, it's not so easy to focus in parts of the
screen other than the center, as it is with the 4T. Both of these cameras
have the same screen (all matte). As an experiment, I carefully placed a
Nikkor (20/3.5) against the bayonet of the 4T and I was hard pressed to
detect any difference in finder performance (when compared to a Zuiko
21/3.5). Conversely, I placed the Zuiko 21/3.5 against the bayonet of a
classic Nikon body and much of the wonderful contrast and apparent
sharpness disappeared. This suggests to me that the finder *is* a real
factor in the OM experience. As many of may know already, the Nikon finder
appears to magnify less, allowing the eye to take in the whole frame more
easily, but focusability suffers as a result. The HP finders from Nikon are
even more like that.
My question, however, is this:
Are there other OM bodies whose finders are on par with the 4T? I will
assume that the OM-4's is identical. I know that the 1 and the 2 have
identical dimensions and much of the same mechanics, so perhaps the finders
are the same. But what of the 2s?
Just curious.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|