Visit MPB Visit MPB Visit MPB

K200 v K20 viewfinder Accuracy ?

timcx500e
Posted 13/08/2009 - 22:00 Link
took quite a few shots on holiday (k200) ,when ive uploaded them onto the computer ive got quite a few with cut off portions of heads,uneven shore /sky balance and shots taken in portrait mode not central , i know i should check on the screen (not always easy in bright sunlight) how much more accurate is the k20 in this respect ?
Edited by timcx500e: 13/08/2009 - 22:01
George Lazarette
Posted 14/08/2009 - 00:47 Link
Sounds like user error to me. Or a damaged camera.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Posted 14/08/2009 - 05:08 Link
K20d has an excellent viewfinder and I haven't got such faults ever. I wonder if you use spectacles, because it may cause some problem viewing through the viewfinder.
Hardgravity
Posted 14/08/2009 - 08:17 Link
My K200 'finder isn't as bright as a K20, but as long as the subject is centred it works fine.

The last time I cut a head of was with my AGFA range finder, that was user error!
Cheers, HG

K110+DA40, K200+DA35, K3 and a bag of lenses, bodies and other bits.

Mustn't forget the Zenits, or folders, or...

PPG entries.
timcx500e
Posted 14/08/2009 - 08:53 Link
so when a review says the k20 has a 95% viewfinder accuracy ,(what is the k200 accuracy ?) does that mean that 5% is removed equally from top/bottom , sides ? going to try some test shots to determine if theres a fault . thanks, tim.
hefty1
Posted 14/08/2009 - 10:13 Link
timcx500e wrote:
so when a review says the k20 has a 95% viewfinder accuracy ,(what is the k200 accuracy ?) does that mean that 5% is removed equally from top/bottom , sides ? going to try some test shots to determine if theres a fault . thanks, tim.

Yes, it means you're seeing the central 95% of what the sensor captures. The K200D shows slightly more at 96%.
Joining the Q
George Lazarette
Posted 14/08/2009 - 11:05 Link
Accuracy is completely the wrong word. It's 100% accurate in terms of centering, but it crops 5% of the picture.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
johnriley
Posted 14/08/2009 - 11:30 Link
There are reasons for this. Basically allowing a small amount of crop in the viewfinder gives a bit of leeway to avoid bits being chopped off images, but the real reason is more probably that a slightly smaller pentaprism/pentamirror becomes possible and that reduces the size of the camera slightly, reduces the weight and may reduce costs as well.
Best regards, John
Anvh
Posted 14/08/2009 - 22:16 Link
I thought that a 100% viewfinder are harder to align probable since there is less room for error then with a 95% viewfinder and that was the reason why they use a 95% viewfinder.
Stefan
Comment Image

K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
hefty1
Posted 14/08/2009 - 22:19 Link
Anvh wrote:
I thought that a 100% viewfinder are harder to align probable since there is less room for error then with a 95% viewfinder and that was the reason why they use a 95% viewfinder.

I've heard that before but I'm not sure if it's true or just one of those urban myths. Be interesting to know
Joining the Q
Anvh
Posted 14/08/2009 - 22:39 Link
hefty1 wrote:
I've heard that before but I'm not sure if it's true or just one of those urban myths. Be interesting to know

Only the high-end cameras seems to have a 100% viewfinder so it might be true. link
Stefan
Comment Image

K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Edited by Anvh: 14/08/2009 - 22:40
George Lazarette
Posted 14/08/2009 - 22:43 Link
I expect both explanations are correct.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Anvh
Posted 14/08/2009 - 22:51 Link
A good read about viewfinders on luminous-landscape link
It seems the 95% coverage is a trade off for getting a higher magnification against the cost of coverage.

Edit: little typo
Stefan
Comment Image

K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Edited by Anvh: 14/08/2009 - 22:54
timcx500e
Posted 16/08/2009 - 10:00 Link
tried a few test shots of a picture frame on the wall ,everything looks fine ! must be my technique at fault . need to try harder. thanks for the info.
tim.

Add Comment

To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.