Screen or viewfinder?

Don Simon · Nov 30, 2006

iflynething said:
Aren't most cameras now, looking in the viewfinder, you see what you get?

Nope. With SLRs what you see is almost what you get, but there's usually a difference of a few percent in the coverage of the viewfinder (only very expensive bodies have 100% coverage)... plus of course you won't see exactly what's being captured at the moment of exposure, because the mirror will be up!

markc · Nov 30, 2006

Michael Humle said:
With regard to DSLRs, I know of only two cameras that have Live View screen function like non-DSLRs. One of the models is the Olympus E-330 and the other is a Fuji but I have fogotten the model number...
Thank you for the compliment on my sig....

That won't be a real SLR though. The R stand for reflex, which means a mirror. The mirror would be in the way of a live LCD view. Picky, I know.

(Technically you could get a live view with a half-silvered mirror, but the view would be rather dim)

Don Simon · Nov 30, 2006

markc said:
That won't be a real SLR though. The R stand for reflex, which means a mirror. The mirror would be in the way of a live LCD view. Picky, I know.

I assume you're talking about the unnamed Fuji - the Olympus does have a mirror.

markc · Nov 30, 2006

Dang. I should have looked at it first. That's a funky set-up. Thanks for the correction.

Michael Humle · Nov 30, 2006

Please read the following regarding the Olympus having "live View" and being a true DSLR....

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0601/06012606olympuse330evolt.asp

iflynething · Nov 30, 2006

ZaphodB said:
Nope. With SLRs what you see is almost what you get, but there's usually a difference of a few percent in the coverage of the viewfinder (only very expensive bodies have 100% coverage)... plus of course you won't see exactly what's being captured at the moment of exposure, because the mirror will be up!

I guess what I meant so say was they are pretty darn accurate. I wonder if there ever will be a time when you do "see what you get."

That has been the only bad thing about the viewfinder is there is just that slight inaccuracy. But I'm sure it's not off THAT much where you can tell. Most of the time I don't remember what should and what shouldn't have been in the picture.

Thanks for the clear up

~Michael~

GrfxGuru · Dec 1, 2006

I'm view finder on the DSLR cuz I have no choice...although if I could choose I'd still do view finder.

On my Kodak P880 I mostly use the view finder but for quick snap stuff I'll use the viewer so I can look beyond the camera to see what's going on before hitting the button...for example people about to walk in shot or something.

Regards,
Peter Witham

iflynething · Dec 1, 2006

You make a good point. It would make sense to use the LCD so you can see objects out of the cameras direct point of view!

~Michael~

CMan · Dec 1, 2006

On my Finepix, I generally use the screen, but only because the viewfinder it has is pretty much worthless, if you know what I mean...

Don Simon · Dec 1, 2006

CMan said:
On my Finepix, I generally use the screen, but only because the viewfinder it has is pretty much worthless, if you know what I mean...

I certainly do... I wear glasses and for me, the viewfinders on most compact point & shoot cameras are completely useless. SLR (film) viewfinders were usually much better, but the viewfinders on some digital SLRs is just shocking. This was true even of many film SLRs once autofocus became standard; it seemed like the camera companies decided that not only would we never need to focus manually again, but also we didn't need to see clearly enough to frame a shot properly... if you consider the point of the viewfinder and the point of an SLR, that's a very bad idea. Fortunately the newer generation of DSLRs suggest that the companies have remembered the importance of being able to actually frame a shot and focus.

LaFoto · Dec 2, 2006

Well, depending on which camera I use it is either.
When I use the 350D it has to be the viewfinder, it being a DSLR there is no choice. But when I use the Powershot, I have developed a technique of framing quite well with the help of the screen. It even reads in the manual that the frame you get to see in the viewfinder does not quite correspond with the actual frame but what you see on the screen does. And I enjoy the flexibility of that camera's screen which gives my "old and aching" (cough-cough) body opportunity to also take the most interesting perspectives without the need to flop myself onto my belly and shoot from there or climb trees to shoot from there or so (ok, my arms are not so long as to match a tree but ... you get my point, don't you?).