Any DSLR cameras with an LCD Viewfinder?

Treymac · May 19, 2007

Hey guys, first post here. I'm new to photography and am just starting. I'm looking at getting an entry level DSLR camera, but that depends on if they have LCD viewfinders. I've really gotten used to using the LCD and can not stand looking through the regular viewfinder because I were glasses. I know that DSLR cameras used to not have LCD viewfinders, but I heard that a couple of years ago. Has there been any changes so that there are some cameras on the market with it? Thanks.

smyth · May 19, 2007

i believe the only ones that do are the Evolt line from Olympus.

If you don't like looking through the viewfinder with glasses however, many have a built in diopter (i believe that is the word) that will correct the image in the viewfinder for your eyesight.

Sw1tchFX · May 19, 2007

The Evolt E-330 is what you're looking for.

Zatodragon · May 20, 2007

The Evolt has the live preview as well as Panasonic's DSLR. The only problem with live preview is each time you auto focus, i've heard the screen blanks off and takes a second longer to focus than when not in live preview mode.

So if you can get the diopter to work for ya, i would try that so you can really open up your range of cameras you can use. Plus, they have this handy gadget for you to use if you really have your heart set on an lcd view finder. http://www.zigview.co.uk/

Good Luck!

darich · May 20, 2007

Personally i prefer using the viewfinder to the screen but on the glasses and diopter thing - I wear glasses and tried adjusting the diopter to compensate when i removed by specs.
It didn't work unfortunately. My eye sight isn't that bad (i can pass a uk driving test without specs) and i reckon it's because i have an astigmatism - my eyes aren't exactly spherical.

Wearing glasses while shooting is actually no great problem at all. Sometimes awkward if shooting from a low angle or against a wall/building etc but in general it's no problem.

Don Simon · May 20, 2007

I wear glasses too, but without them I doubt I'd be lucky to cross the road alive, nevermind pass a driving test :lol:

so for me no diopter adjustment's strong enough; I have to wear glasses or contact lenses. And in general I agree it's not that hard shooting with modern dSLRs. Not compared to say rangefinders where I have to put contacts in or I can't see the whole frame. Many of the previous generation of dSLRs had tiny dark viewfinders that I considered pretty inadequate, but they're getting better. The one thing I'm really not that happy with is manual focus; it became less convenient with 35mm when they went from manual focus to autofocus and took out the bright screens and split-circles, and it became even less so with the smaller and darker viewfinders on most dSLRs. I know lots of people don't find it a problem, but as a fellow specs wearer I thought I'd give my opinion. Of course you might not use manual focus enough to consider it an issue. Other than that, shooting shouldn't be too hard if you are used to using a viewfinder. Of course if you're more comfortable using LCDs then you could definitely consider the Olympus line.

Sw1tchFX · May 20, 2007

ZaphodB said:
I wear glasses too, but without them I doubt I'd be lucky to cross the road alive, nevermind pass a driving test so for me no diopter adjustment's strong enough; I have to wear glasses or contact lenses. And in general I agree it's not that hard shooting with modern dSLRs. Not compared to say rangefinders where I have to put contacts in or I can't see the whole frame. Many of the previous generation of dSLRs had tiny dark viewfinders that I considered pretty inadequate, but they're getting better. The one thing I'm really not that happy with is manual focus; it became less convenient with 35mm when they went from manual focus to autofocus and took out the bright screens and split-circles, and it became even less so with the smaller and darker viewfinders on most dSLRs. I know lots of people don't find it a problem, but as a fellow specs wearer I thought I'd give my opinion. Of course you might not use manual focus enough to consider it an issue.

ditto. I have to wear contacts if I decide to shoot with my FE.

Mike_E · May 20, 2007

I suggest you get a Yashica Mat 124 and a scanner.

RVsForFun · May 20, 2007

I have on in a personal camera and the viewfinder absolutely washes out in daylight. And I wear glasses, too, which contributes to the light entering the viewfinder. LCD finders are basically TV/video screens, and they're horrible in daylight.

DSLR noob · May 20, 2007

The Canon EOS 1D Mark III

oh wait... too expensive?

AlexisRhea · May 20, 2007

The Olympus Evolt 330 and 410 have the option to use the LCD while shooting. The 500 unfortunately does not. Depending on the $ you want to spend, it looks like the new 410 is a fabulous camera.

Iron Flatline · May 21, 2007

Leica Digilux 3... it's a cousin of a Panasonic camera, but with different firmware, longer warranty, and a small red dot on the front with the word Leica on it.

Very sweet camera.

Peniole · May 21, 2007

The new Evolt E-510 does too. It's basically an upgraded 500 with IS and live view LCD. Oh and they upgraded the sensor to an NMOS sensor. $899 one lens kit, and $999 for the 14-42mm and 40-150mm 2 lens kit.

Sw1tchFX · May 21, 2007

Iron Flatline said:
Leica Digilux 3... it's a cousin of a Panasonic camera, but with different firmware, longer warranty, and a small red dot on the front with the word Leica on it.

Very sweet camera.

I remember when you (i'm pretty sure it was you) posted up a RAW file from it, and when I opened it up in Lightroom, my jaw just dropped.

Sharpest damn RAW file i've ever seen in my life! :lol:

Iron Flatline · May 21, 2007

People like to make fun of Leica when they don't know much about it, but once you drill down you realize it's the oldest camera company in the world, and ALL they do is glass. They build telescopes, and projectors, and hunting scopes, and all that stuff regarding glass. Their basic lenses compete with Canon L lenses, and then it goes up from there.

It's sort of like Porsche. You can argue that a Nissan 350 Z and a Porsche 911 are close in specs, but drive them, and you realize one is a car from a company that produces something in every catagory, and the others just build sports cars... (and that VW-based SUV we'll pretend doesn't exist...)