5D MK lll Intelligent Viewfinder and focusing screen reviews ?

[rlarsen]

With all the hands-on reviews of the MK lll, how about some comments on the Intelligent Viewfinder and focusing screen.
After using 1-D bodies for years I'm not crazy about having AF boxes on the screen of my MK ll, so I welcome the change in the new camera.
Can it be set up like 1-D so the selected AF lights up only briefly ?

How bright is the focusing screen and how well does it perform for manual focus ?

The best screen I ever had was the crisp and sharp, glass, all-matte K screen in my old F-1n film cameras. The gold standard for manual focusing.

Also, isn't odd that the viewfinder is described as APPROX 100%. It's either 100% or not, right ?

 

[Sdiver2489]

Also, isn't odd that the viewfinder is described as APROX 100%. It's either 100% or not, right ?

No, there are tolerances on everything. Rather than "It's either 100% or not" you should be saying "Nothing can be perfectly 100% right?"

Its like your TV, on one wants to see "past" the edges of the picture. This was moreso true in CRT days and led to "overscan". The image was purposely made larger than the screen so the edges of the picture were never seen by the user due to manufacturing tolerances. Its the same with a focusing screen, if you saw past what your image captured, you might see the edge of a lens, or filter, or just see more than you were capturing and this would irritate people. So, the actual coverage of a viewfinder is probably 98.5-100% depending on the individual sample

 

[JonJT]

Also, isn't odd that the viewfinder is described as APROX 100%. It's either 100% or not, right ?

No, there are tolerances on everything. Rather than "It's either 100% or not" you should be saying "Nothing can be perfectly 100% right?"

Its like your TV, on one wants to see "past" the edges of the picture. This was moreso true in CRT days and led to "overscan". The image was purposely made larger than the screen so the edges of the picture were never seen by the user due to manufacturing tolerances. Its the same with a focusing screen, if you saw past what your image captured, you might see the edge of a lens, or filter, or just see more than you were capturing and this would irritate people. So, the actual coverage of a viewfinder is probably 98.5-100% depending on the individual sample

Sure, nothing is perfect but, that doesn't mean it is useful to describe it as approximately 100%. Those tolerances, what ever they are, are likely such a small percentage of the stated value that it will not be perceptible to the user. We are not Canon engineers so, why say "approx". Just state the nominal value and be done with it.

 

[Viggo]

The tolerance is no where near 2,5%. "98,5-100%" no way, but it's set so that no one can measure their individual camera and suit canon for all their money if it's only 99,92%.

 

[rlarsen]

I'm more interested in first-hand accounts of the Intelligent Viewfinder, and focusing screen quality.

The tolerance issue is somewhat interesting though because Canon could say Approximately for a variety of their camera specs. Approx 6 frames per sec., etc. etc.