Best Viewfinder and Manual Focus Experience

<p>Another really good <a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/pentaxlx/viewfinders/viewfinders.htm">Pentax LX viewfinders</a> page <em><<< click</em></p>

<p>If possible try before you buy, preferably with a variety of lenses. Might mean visiting a large camera shop (if possible) or visiting a few friends that have what you're interested in.</p>

<p>Like Gus, I really like the Olympus OM-1 finders. They are honestly the only ones that ever actually "wowed" me.</p>

<p>Lots of other good ones, of course. One of my favorites is the original Nikon F with the plain prism finder.</p>

<p>Gus Lazzari:</p>

<p>I took up your challenge, having recently acquired a Pentax ME Super I can compare to my Nikon F3HP. I agree: The HP wins for my glasses (and seeing the aperture in the finder), but the ME Super wins for everything else.</p>

<p>The ME Super is brighter, bigger, clearer, better with color, and sharper (or so it seems). I have to move my head around with my glasses on so that I can see the whole frame. If I didn't wear glasses, I'd jam my eyeball right into that finder, and it's a beautiful world.</p>

<p>The F3HP is only better in that with glasses, I can see the whole frame in a stand-off sort of way. But in direct comparison, it suffers by comparison. Throw in the Throw Weight, and I'll take the F3HP with me when I'm not travelling far and / or using a tripod. The ME Super is currently king-of-my-bike-bag, having just replaced the Olympus 35 DC (too little control, and not quite perfectly sharp lens).</p>

<p>But my Go-To camera of all time has been the Nikon FE. I held it up to the ME Super, and wow, what a difference; not all good. The ME Super wins in Brightness (even mounted with the SMC Pentax-M f2.0 compared to the Nikon's AIs f/1.8.) The ME Super wins in clarity; the matte finish about half-way to the sides is much clearer than the Nikon. The ME Super wins in weight, of course. The FE wins in data display: analog, needle meter, full f/stops in the viewfinder. Eye relief is a tie for the glasses wearer. I'm guessing that the Nikon would be the slightly technically better glass than the Pentax, but that's just a guess. Nothing probably matters at F/8. The FE also has DOF preview and effective MLU, so that helps it win when I'm going to be seriously shooting. But for around town carry, I'm currently on the ME Super.</p>

<p>Fascinating. Thanks for the thread, y'all. It puts my F3HP in its place where it belongs: On The Shelf.</p>

<p>"If I didn't wear glasses, I'd jam my eyeball right into that finder, and it's a beautiful world."</p>

<p>I like that statement. All I needed to hear.</p>

<p>I like the Action Finders for the Nikon F and F2 that give an experience similar to looking at a small TV, and making the camera bodies more dangerous as tools for splitting wood - and heads. The downside is the added weight on top. The equivalent accessory for the Canon F-1, called the Sports Finder, adds the capability for waist-level viewing through an ingenious mechanism that allows it to be swung up 90 degrees. </p>

<p>One reason I use RF cameras for most of my photography is the presence of their aerial viewfinders, admittedly not usually as accurate for field coverage as some SLRs, but of a brightness independent of maximum lens opening of attached optics. I once tested briefly a Leicaflex Standard (initial model) SLR system, which rather uniquely has an aerial VF and a small central RF patch. While it does not have the ability of stopped down depth of field analysis (not always easy to do) it did have a fine VF. As others mention, buying into another expensive lens line was not an option in my case. Also, the non TTL exposure meter and ugly duckling appearance of the camera (a minor point in my consideration) worked against a buy decision.</p>