Why Should I use the Viewfinder?

[ralphh]

Weirdly, I actually find it easier (or more precisely, less effort) composing using LCD than viewfinder - I find it easier to look at the whole frame at once and get the edges right with the LCD - with viewfinder I have to make the effort not to get drawn into my subject and only look at the focus point - it can just be too immersive somehow...

If you have a tilting LCD try tilting it up and tucking your elbows in at your waist - I found that very stable stance back when I had a G12.

Exposure is also rather easier to judge looking at a screen / EVF than optical

Then again i somehow find it more enjoyable using an optical viewfinder than an electronic one. I have no idea why - logic tells me that an EVF is really more useful to and OVF in the same way as TTL is more useful than range finder for most things. There are advantages to seeing not only what the lens sees, but actually what the sensor sees... and yet... I just enjoy an OVF :S


To get back to your actual question, for me main (/only real) advantage of VF vs screen is being able to see it properly in bright light

 

[runnah]

If I am shooting video I used the lcd, but 100% of the time for photos I use the VF.

 

[o hey tyler]

If I am shooting video I used the lcd, but 100% of the time for photos I use the VF.

Well, if you're using a DSLR, you won't see much through the viewfinder if you're shorting video.

 

[runnah]

If I am shooting video I used the lcd, but 100% of the time for photos I use the VF.

Well, if you're using a DSLR, you won't see much through the viewfinder if you're shorting video.

It was a joke.

 

[skieur]

What's the advantage of using the optical (or in my case, electronic) viewfinder if I could use the back screen in Live View (or, in my case, the Sony equivalent)?

Steadier w/ arms in towards chest?

And even MUCH steadier if you have a telephoto or simply heavy lens on your camera.

 

[Solarflare]

Viewfinder is my standard mode. [...]

Oh, I forgot to mention: also, in contrast detection autofocus (CDAF) mode, which is what DSLRs use in lifeview mode (unless they have one of these fancy phase detection AF on chip stuff), my D5100 is horribly slow to focus - 2 secs. Thats the main reason I pretty quickly got used to use the viewfinder whenever possible.

 

[imagemaker46]

It's steady, easier to keep the horizon lines straight, easier to see what you are shooting, composition. If you have to wait to shoot, your shoulders will get tired especially if you're using any lens other than a very short one. I think it looks a little silly holding a camera at arms length.

But what ever makes you happy, and whatever works for you.

 

[o hey tyler]

It was a joke.

Should have used comic sans bro.

 

[runnah]

It was a joke.

Should have used comic sans bro.

OK brah!

 

[invisible]

I always use the viewfinder but under certain circumstances (e.g., macro) I switch to live view because it makes focusing and framing much easier. I always have my camera on a tripod though. And yes, my Nikon bodies are power vampires when live view is on... especially in the winter when temperatures reach unholy depths.

 

[TehYoyo]

I've always had problems with focus using live view because the screen is so small to check the focus (and it's not always feasible to magnify). Also it gets really hard when there is strong ambient light, like sunlight for example. Don't you guys have issues seeing details?

The back, 3" LCD is smaller than the viewfinder?

Well in DSLRs one obvious benefit is the quicker autofocus using viewfinder.

Howso?

 

[Jarmo]

Well in DSLRs one obvious benefit is the quicker autofocus using viewfinder.

Howso?[/QUOTE]

I can't tell exactly why it is. Something to do with the mirror being locked up and sensor being exposed perhaps.. The difference is obvious though. Focusing through the viewfinder in good lighting conditions takes under a second while focusing with the mirror locked up takes well over a second.

 

[Solarflare]

The back, 3" LCD is smaller than the viewfinder?

They dont have much resolution; at best VGA (640x480). They usually hide this by giving some bogus numbers (like "1 mio pixel", but you need 3 of these "pixels" for one actual colored pixel, plus another extra pixels if they have a white pixel for more brightness, too).

The best new electronice viewfinders may have more resolution. Optical viewfinders obviously have just as much resolution as your eye can manage.

 

[OrionsByte]

Well in DSLRs one obvious benefit is the quicker autofocus using viewfinder.

Generally more accurate, also.

 

[usayit]

Well in DSLRs one obvious benefit is the quicker autofocus using viewfinder.

Generally more accurate, also.

One can argue that CDAF is more accurate than PDAF since CDAF is focusing off of sensor on contrast versus PDAF which relies on proper calibration of the whole system. But no doubt, PDAF found in DSLR is better for tracking objects even though the technology exists for CDAF to be on par for static subjects.