RE: [Leica] Pros, Leicas, and losing market share.

["Jonathan Borden" <jborden@mediaone.net>]

Actually, with an SLR you see what the image looks like wide open i.e. with
minimal DOF, unless you also stop down the lens you don't actually see what
is recorded on film. Even if you do stop down, the dynamic range of the eye
is much different from the particular film you employ, so the image in any
viewfinder is  only an approximation of that which is rendered on film. With
experience, the mind's eye can see what will be recorded on film. Arguably
what is seen within an SLR viewfinder may be more easily translated by a
neophyte into an approximation of what is recorded, but just as arguably, an
expert will not be hindered by the RF viewfinder. I would expect that a true
expert might not need the viewfinder at all ... perhaps this is the market
the neo-Voigtlander is aimed at :-)

Jonathan Borden

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of
> Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)
> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 1999 7:41 PM
> To: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us'
> Subject: RE: [Leica] Pros, Leicas, and losing market share.
>
>
> Hi Marc,
>
> Yes, you get 90% of the image in the viewfinder, except for the
> few like the
> Nikon F5, EOS-1N, etc.
> But what I am saying is that you SEE the image 100% of the time with an
> EOS-1n RS SLR, or will see the image at the magnification provided by the
> lens employed.  Yes, they are somewhat bigger than the perennial M, but
> there are advantages.  If you use a 135mm on an SLR you will see the image
> as it will appear on the film, with an M you see only what appears in the
> little frame.  Much different.  Hence, my premise is right!
>
> Peter K
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc James Small [mailto:msmall@roanoke.infi.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 1999 4:05 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: RE: [Leica] Pros, Leicas, and losing market share.
>
>
> At 03:39 PM 11/16/1999 -0800, Peter Kotsinadelis wrote:
> >Sometimes technology can give you the best of all worlds.
>
> Pete
>
> All that an SLR gives you is a large, clunky, nasty, and unfocusable body.
> Very few SLR's, incidentally, have EVER provided a 100% VF.  Most are
> around 90%.  Hence, your basic premise is wrong.
>
> Marc
>
> msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
> Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!
>