In article <4b2ujm$58l@lectura.CS.Arizona.EDU>, bmtong@CS.Arizona.EDU says...
>In article <4b1h9k$6aj@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,
>Bob Neuman wrote:
>>Hmmm.... 15% loss represents what percentage of a stop? If you wantto
>>see how meaningful 15% loss is, stop a lens down one whole stop from
>>wide-open (using the DOF preview button) - a whopping 50% loss is
>>pretty subtle, I think, let alone 15% - which can be more than
>>compensated for using different screen designs, prismimprovements,etc.
>>And, yes, an F3 viewfinder IS the model for the state-of-the-art
>>bright, sharp, undistorted, accurate, easy to see SLR finder,IM(NS)HO.
>
>Still I couldn't explain why the F3 finder seems to be so much darker
>than the ones of FM2/FE2/FA. IM(NS)HO, the latter cameras are better
>than F3, while their screens do not seem to be significantly less sharp.

Strange! Are you using the same lens on each camera? I just went
downstairs and put 50mm f1.8 lenses on an F3 an FA and compared
them side by side - pretty darn similar in brightness! (But the
F3 viewfinder shows virtually 100% of the film area, is sharp to
the corners, is easy to see the over the whole frame, and does
not have pincushion distortion - unlike the FM2/FE2/FA finders
(and virtually all others made by all manufacturers these days).
Add to that very sturdy construction, good metering (and the
only metering, as far as I know, that is good for PC lenses),
and a package size and weight not significantly greater than an
FA, and I would call the F3 hard to beat (except for SOME TTL
applications [You can even do TTL fill ratios with it!]). I
like the FM2/FE2/FA's, also (and N2000's, N6000's, 8008's, N90's,
F's, F2's, and other nice Nikon bodies - each has its place and
uses). But if I could take only one camera to that desert isle
for a very extended stay, I can sure tell you which I would
prefer to take (along with some spare lithium 3v batteries...).
Hope this helps.