Huck Finn
Well-known
I came across this post-Photokina comment by Stephen Gandy:
"Epson's RD-1 uses the same shutter and similar finder to the other new Cosina-made rangefinders. Using only 3 framelines, 28/35/50, the 28 will be unfortunately close to useless with eyeglass users. Epson makes a big deal of the RD-1 having the first 1:1 finder. True enough, but Epson's inexperience in RF design shows in choosing the 1:1 finder in a camera with 28/35/50 framelines that makes 1/3 of the framelines useless for eyeglass wearers. The .7 finder would have been a much wiser choice for this camera."
I may be showing my own "inexperience in (digital) rangefinder design," but doesn't a 28mm lens on a 1.5 digital camera = 42mm field of view? Isn't this the same viewfinder as the R3A except that the R3A uses even slightly wider 40mm framelines?
As I read it, Stephen is in effect indirectly knocking his own product - or at least the product he represents. What am I missing here? 😕
"Epson's RD-1 uses the same shutter and similar finder to the other new Cosina-made rangefinders. Using only 3 framelines, 28/35/50, the 28 will be unfortunately close to useless with eyeglass users. Epson makes a big deal of the RD-1 having the first 1:1 finder. True enough, but Epson's inexperience in RF design shows in choosing the 1:1 finder in a camera with 28/35/50 framelines that makes 1/3 of the framelines useless for eyeglass wearers. The .7 finder would have been a much wiser choice for this camera."
I may be showing my own "inexperience in (digital) rangefinder design," but doesn't a 28mm lens on a 1.5 digital camera = 42mm field of view? Isn't this the same viewfinder as the R3A except that the R3A uses even slightly wider 40mm framelines?
As I read it, Stephen is in effect indirectly knocking his own product - or at least the product he represents. What am I missing here? 😕