As noted in an earlier post in the MFC forum, I now have a Nikon F3HP, and the high-eyepoint finder is really remarkable to me. For years I've been trying to see as much as possible in SLR viewfinders while wearing glasses, and finally I pick up the one camera that makes it really easy! This inspired me to go through a number of CMC SLRs in my collection and rate them on how friendly they are to those of us who wear glasses full-time. This isn't really a scientific survey, and others may for whatever reason find that their experiences differ from mine; but this is what I see when I look through these cameras. Cream of the crop: Nikon F3HP. (You knew that already, right?) I can easily see everything, including the far corners of the image and the ADR and LCD displays, even if my eye is not perfectly centered. A wonderful viewfinder. The next group are good but not quite that good. With these, I can see the full image but not the separate shutter speed or aperture displays (Canon A-1, Minolta XK with "battleship" AE finder), or I can see everything but only if my eye is perfectly centered and I stare directly at the center of the image (Minolta XE-7, Nikon F with standard prism, Nikon F2 with DP-1 finder, Nikon FE, Nikon FM). Next come the "almost but not quite" cameras, where I can see everything except the extreme corners (Minolta SR-T 201, Minolta X-700, Nikon F2 with DP-2 finder), or where I can't quite get all four edges in view at once (Olympus OM-2N, Pentax Spotmatic F, Pentax SV). Lastly, those cameras that don't even come close: Canon FT QL, Minolta SR-1, Minolta X-370, Minolta X-570, Minolta XD-11, and Nikon FG. The SR-1 and FG might have rated better, but they have sharp edges around the viewfinder which conceivably could scratch glass, so I didn't want to get too close to them. If these could be covered with a screw-in diopter, it would presumably reduce their field of view even more. Not too surprisingly, we see here that higher-end cameras tend to provide better views than low-end cameras. Beyond that generalization, I think the sample size (both of camera models and people) is too small to reach any conclusions.