Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/08/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]G'day David, The RT is about as bright as my R4. This places it definitely down the ladder from an SL or R8. As to focusing, it is normal Canon which means I don't have any issues in low light but many people find the Canon screen very hard to focus. You can find a split image or microprism for it. If I remember the instructions, it uses a special, brighter screen, to maintain screen brightness in light of the 1/3 stop light loss at the viewfinder. With the exception of the rather sharp shutter followed by a relatively loud wind motor the camera is in many respects very M like with a better view a 100mm. Don dorysrus@mindspring.com - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of David Young Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 5:35 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: [Leica] Re: "lag time" and the real world David Dorn wrote: >The EOS-RT was my last (for many years) SLR. I seem to recall a number of >tests supporting the short lag time and my own experience would confirm it. Your points are well made and well taken. Thanks for commenting. I am curious. I've never had the opportunity to peer through a pellicle mirror camera of any kind. But I notice a huge difference in finder brightness between, say, an R3 and an R8 or SL. Or between the R5/R6 and a Nikon F2Sa. How do the Canon EOS-RT and others compare in finder brightness? Specifically, how are they to focus in reasonably dim light? - ---------- David Young, | égalité, liberté, Victoria, CANADA | fraternité et Beaujolais. Website at: www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html