Question about view finder

[darkpbstar]

Hello again. I'm just wondering if you have to look through the viewfinder to see what you are taking, as opposed to the picture being displayed on the LCD screen? I know the screen at least shows the picture after you take it, or you are able to view it by hitting the "play" button or whatever. I want to look through the viewfinder anyway, it feels like you are getting more into the picture, and the camera, and it becomes a part of you so to speak. I was just curious. I'll look through the viewfinder either way.
Thanks!

 

[Steph]

It depends on the camera. Some offer live view and some don't. What camera were you refering to?

 

[dangergoinoff]

Depends what type of camera you have.
My girlfriend just bought a new Nikon Finepix and it doesnt even have a viewfinder. Just the LCD screen.

 

[Palyriot]

The majority of DSLRs do not have live view and almost every point and shoot does.

 

[nynfortoo]

It's worth noting that most P&S etc. cameras have an electronic viewfinder, if one at all. They're generally of pretty poor quality compared to the LCD display.

DSLRs etc. have optical viewfinders, of much higher quality. And most don't offer any sort of Live View through the LCD screen.

I do find, though, that looking through the viewfinder helps close out the rest of the world so you can really concentrate on the composition. Not to mention I find my ability to hold the camera steady is better with it held to my eye.

 

[Senor Hound]

I am all for live view. As a matter of fact, if I ever get to a point where I can get really afford what I want, I'll make sure my DSLR has one.

I was talking to someone about Leica Rangefinders, and they told me they liked them PARTIALLY because they didn't feel cramped up looking at the photo with them. Like they could see outside things going on, and how that made the experience better. Having never used a rangefinder, I don't know exactly what the feeling is like, but I get something similar when I'm out and about using live view.

When I'm shooting, I hold the camera like I'm going to push it up to my eye, but instead stop short about 6 inches from my face. I get all the stability I have when I put it up to my eye, but I can also see things around me, and I get a large, clear image of what I'm about to shoot. And as a contacts user, it really makes the difference from having to keep one eye closed while squaring stuff up. Its hard enough to focus a camera, let alone my own eye!

Anyway, I don't want to get into a live view debate, but I would do whatever it takes to make you happy shooting photos. If you're a live-view person, awesome! If you take the old-school viewfinder approach, then great! Just as long as you are happy, and your photos don't suffer from using one over the other (mine don't, and I doubt your photo's will), then its all good.

 

[Tiberius47]

Live view on dSLR cameras is becoming more and more common. At the moment, there are several different ways of doing it, with different manufacturers using different methods. However, many of the different methods limit the ability to focus, as the focus sensors need the mirror down in order to focus, but the mirror needs to be up in Live View. Live view will be a standard feature across dSLRs within a year or two, I'd say, but at the moment it is just found on the newest cameras.

 

[JimmyO]

The view finders on P and S cameras are crap. There super tiny and if there digital theres a lag time between when the subject moves and when u see it move. So if your shooting with a dslr i would most definetly use the view finder for stability and easy framing, but if your using a P&S then just use the lcd as it will be easier. I guess one reason to not use the big LCD would be to conserve battery though

 

[Dao]

For Point and shoot (P&S) camera, I believe the liveview is the way to go. Especially what you see in the viewfinder of "most" of the P&S camera may not be what you get in the picture especially when you take a photo of an object that is close to the camera. (If you see a tiny window position at the top front of the camera)

And now I am used to the viewfinder in my DSLR, I like it better because of the stability. But I do agree that liveview is a good feature to have. You never know, sometimes you just need to take a picture when looking through the viewfinder is not possible.

 

[joshme17]

If your getting a DSLR, it most likely won't show on the screen. If its a point and shoot, it will.

 

[Tiberius47]

The biggest disadvantage with live view is that you need to have the camera away from your body. having your eye to the viewfinder gives the camera extra stability, reducing camera shake.

 

[mrodgers]

Live view on the LCD it must be noted, is a giant plus when using a tripod.

The term "P&S" must be defined as most call mine a "P&S". Really, there are very few true P&S cameras anymore. Most of the so called "P&S" cameras do have some limited control up to the complete full control that you have with dSLRs.

Let's start calling them compact, superzooms, and dSLRs from now on . With compact digital cameras, I have yet to see one with the LCD display in the viewfinder. If they have a viewfinder, they are usually optical, but not through the lens. They are offset through it's own optics and do not give the exact same image as the lens. That said, the majority of compact digitals no longer offer a viewfinder and only offer view with the LCD on the back.

Most of the superzooms do have viewfinders. They are all LCD and offer the view through the lens. Just as dSLR cameras, what you see through the viewfinder on the superzooms is what your sensor sees. It's a toss up about the comment earlier that they lag behind. Some do and some don't. My viewfinder on my Fuji runs at 60 FPS (frames per second), same as the LCD on the back. There is no noticable lag in the picture that you see. In researching cameras, I did see many of them only running at 30 FPS.

When I was looking for a new camera, having a viewfinder was important to me. It's one of the reasons I chose the camera that I did, though the first one I chose when I had a compact in my hand (Canon SD1000) also had a viewfinder, so that didn't hold a whole lot of weight in my decision. Other factors (size and zoom) is what made the decision. I don't think I would be nearly as happy, or doing what I am doing with the camera if I would have gone with one that doesn't have a viewfinder. Originally I was looking for a new family camera, then decided on one with more capabilities than a small camera when I started reading about photography and new I wanted to do a bit more than family snapshots.

The only time I use the back panel LCD is when I have the camera on the tripod.

 

[Joves]

I have yet to use the Live View on my D300 and, doubt I ever will.

 

[McQueen278]

I rarely use live view on my 40D, but I do use it to hold the camera over my head for difficult shots. It also displays 100% of the shot where the viewfinder shows something like 97%. That's all I can say good about them, I'll refrain from complaining about people who are driving the market towards DSLRs that work like p&s. All I'll say is that SLR use means less and less about the skill of a photographer every generation of camera.