[Leica] Re: "lag time" and the real world

["David M. dorn" <dmdorn_ct_usa@mac.com>]

On Friday, August 8, 2003, at 09:00  PM, Leica Users digest wrote:

> 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,

As I recall the light loss due the pellicle mirror was about 1/3 of an 
f stop.  Using it with the Canon 50mm f/1.8 and longer lenses of 
f/2.8-f/3.5 I could tell no real difference between the RT and my OM-1 
and Nikon with similar lenses.  In low light, the finder brightness 
reduction due to the aperture closing was never noticed as I was 
usually shooting at or near wide-open.  The RT was also quiet and 
completely reliable as one should expect with no mirror slapping around 
at each shot.

I only returned to rangefinders because I wanted to work almost 
exclusively with 35mm and shorter lenses and rangefinders are better on 
this score.

In my opinion the RT is the SLR that a dedicated range finder user 
should look for while they may still be available.  An RT with a 
70-200/210 high quality lens would be a perfect complement to 21/28, 35 
& 50 rangefinder kit.  The lag similarity would require no change of 
timing for the shooter.

David

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html