giellaleafapmu
Well-known
Just curious how do you guys shot a camera without a VF? I know that most of us
are old enough that those things didn't even existed when we got into photography, unless we count view cameras as cameras without VF. I also know that we can always
shot a small camera as if it was a view camera or add a VF. However, more and
more nice cameras are appearing which have no VF and are attractive because of price and small size and sometimes it happens that one wants to shot them "as they are". I started using them "as everybody do", kind of half flexed harms but I find both difficult to compose and not very steady. Then I tried to pretend they had a VF and guess-compose,
much more stable but not too precise, of course. Recently I started experimenting with
a "gunman style". I hope I am not going to offend anti-gun people but since I also like guns I figured that maybe if a grip is good enough to stay within a degree or so of precision holding a machine which recoils it could as well be good to old steady a camera. Of course, it is not the grip of the bad guys in Tarantino's movies, more a sportsman thing, something like Jerry Miculek meets Joe McNally. So flexed legs, straight harms, laced hands, quite better but a bit too dramatic in most cases and I end up shooting with the thumb. How do you guys shot these cameras? Is there any better technique?
GLF
are old enough that those things didn't even existed when we got into photography, unless we count view cameras as cameras without VF. I also know that we can always
shot a small camera as if it was a view camera or add a VF. However, more and
more nice cameras are appearing which have no VF and are attractive because of price and small size and sometimes it happens that one wants to shot them "as they are". I started using them "as everybody do", kind of half flexed harms but I find both difficult to compose and not very steady. Then I tried to pretend they had a VF and guess-compose,
much more stable but not too precise, of course. Recently I started experimenting with
a "gunman style". I hope I am not going to offend anti-gun people but since I also like guns I figured that maybe if a grip is good enough to stay within a degree or so of precision holding a machine which recoils it could as well be good to old steady a camera. Of course, it is not the grip of the bad guys in Tarantino's movies, more a sportsman thing, something like Jerry Miculek meets Joe McNally. So flexed legs, straight harms, laced hands, quite better but a bit too dramatic in most cases and I end up shooting with the thumb. How do you guys shot these cameras? Is there any better technique?
GLF
MIkhail
-
Let's be honest: shooting with digital camera without VF sucks.
You will never be as stable as with VF pressed against your face.
One option that you may resort to, if you happen to have Sony NEX, is to shoot camera the "rolleflex style", looking down to the screen, flipped 90 degreees.... I guess it is OK.
You will never be as stable as with VF pressed against your face.
One option that you may resort to, if you happen to have Sony NEX, is to shoot camera the "rolleflex style", looking down to the screen, flipped 90 degreees.... I guess it is OK.
c.poulton
Well-known
Slightly off topic but shooting today with my Rolleiflex TLR I was thinking that its not a million miles away from using a digital camera's LCD screen to compose, albeit you look down on a TLR (usually), however with a lot of digital cameras now incorporating swivel screens, the similarity is very close.
I hate using cameras without viewfinders (fixed screen LCD's), however this might be the compromise that I need?
Still, there's the ergonomics of the camera to consider and this might just not work...
I hate using cameras without viewfinders (fixed screen LCD's), however this might be the compromise that I need?
Still, there's the ergonomics of the camera to consider and this might just not work...
GaryLH
Veteran
That is true for any camera w/ a flip up screen such as the m43 cameras that don't have an evf.
But a lot depends on how good the in body stabilization system.. Will depend a lot on how sharp your pictures will end up even if u use 2 or 3x the shutter speed relative to focal length.
Gary
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
Yep, the TLR style is maybe the best, except that my only cameras without VF are a K-01 and a Q, both without a swivel screen... 
GLF
GLF
GaryLH
Veteran
I normally don't carry a camera w/o the ability to have at least a hot shoe mountable optical vf. But w/ cameras like the rx100, Coolpix A, and Ricoh Grd, that rule went away for the convenience of a truly pocketable camera w/ very good iq.
I have a rx100 myself. I can put it in the front pocket w/o problem. In the past one of the main issues w/ LCD only was bright sunlight washout, while it has not totally disappeared, the new display technologies such as the one used on the rx100 make it quite usable in bright sunlight and the stabilization is very good.
Gary
I have a rx100 myself. I can put it in the front pocket w/o problem. In the past one of the main issues w/ LCD only was bright sunlight washout, while it has not totally disappeared, the new display technologies such as the one used on the rx100 make it quite usable in bright sunlight and the stabilization is very good.
Gary
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Point and hope, as with pinhole cameras.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
I never enjoyed it for anything longer than 35mm. I use the Ricoh GR with just the LCD and I find it is nice for a wide. However, the Sigma DP2m isn't as nice for me.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
My first quality digital camera was a Sony DSC-F707. It had a superb Zeiss lens, a (somewhat crappy) EVF, and a (smallish) LCD. The body rotated relative to the lens.
Compared to using a waist level finder with a medium format camera, the LCD was easier to see and frame with in most lighting situations. AF took care of the focusing for me most of the time.
Over the years since, LCDs and EVFs have both become better and better. With short focal length lenses, like the X2's 35mm EFoV and the GXR-M with lenses up to 28mm focal length, I can quickly glance at the LCD and see the focus is good or not, then either frame with the LCD and shoot or use an eye-level optical finder for framing and shooting. With longer focal lengths on the GXR-M or E-PL1, I generally want the EVF in place for accurate focusing and framing.
Put *any* of these cameras on a tripod and I pull out my magnifier and work just as I once did with a view or field camera. And it's much easier since the LCD is far brighter and easier to see. Resolution is lower, but since I focus by looking for the in-out transition point rather than evaluating maximum sharpness, resolution is of less concern.
G
Compared to using a waist level finder with a medium format camera, the LCD was easier to see and frame with in most lighting situations. AF took care of the focusing for me most of the time.
Over the years since, LCDs and EVFs have both become better and better. With short focal length lenses, like the X2's 35mm EFoV and the GXR-M with lenses up to 28mm focal length, I can quickly glance at the LCD and see the focus is good or not, then either frame with the LCD and shoot or use an eye-level optical finder for framing and shooting. With longer focal lengths on the GXR-M or E-PL1, I generally want the EVF in place for accurate focusing and framing.
Put *any* of these cameras on a tripod and I pull out my magnifier and work just as I once did with a view or field camera. And it's much easier since the LCD is far brighter and easier to see. Resolution is lower, but since I focus by looking for the in-out transition point rather than evaluating maximum sharpness, resolution is of less concern.
G
Jan Pedersen
Well-known
I don't. Would never even think about buying a camera without a VF. Maybe i am to old but relying on a LCD screen which is almost impossible to see on a sunny day would not do it for me.
If digital it needs a FF sensor and a View Finder.
If digital it needs a FF sensor and a View Finder.
Sylvester
Well-known
I don't shoot it. That how I shoot it.
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
This has never been a problem for me.
If a camera doesn't have a viewfinder, I won't buy one. Problem solved.
I guess I am into that "proper camera" thing. JMHO but it seems to me that a real camera needs to have a viewfinder. A real lens needs to have an aperture ring - and depth of field markings (I know, I know: I'm a neanderthal...)
If a camera doesn't have a viewfinder, I won't buy one. Problem solved.
I guess I am into that "proper camera" thing. JMHO but it seems to me that a real camera needs to have a viewfinder. A real lens needs to have an aperture ring - and depth of field markings (I know, I know: I'm a neanderthal...)
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
This is what I hate about the vast majority of digital cameras, and I can't believe the masses settle for looking at a screen on the back of the camera to compose their shots. As noisycheese says, the lack of a viewfinder means I will not consider the camera as a possible purchase. (And those with optical finders tend to only show like 80% of the image, which is hardly optimal.)
Using a camera TLR style if it has an articulated LCD screen is a nice workaround -- but it's a long way from ideal.
Using a camera TLR style if it has an articulated LCD screen is a nice workaround -- but it's a long way from ideal.
back alley
IMAGES
some of you guys are really keeping yourselves in a box!
i have a sony rx100, no finder, just a back lcd and it works fine. i have taken some really nice shots with it.
i like holding the camera really high or really low and checking out the back screen...impossible to do with a standard finder.
remember when one of the features of a pro camera was the ability to take off the finder and just look at the screen for overhead shots?
such creative people and you hold yourselves back!
i have a sony rx100, no finder, just a back lcd and it works fine. i have taken some really nice shots with it.
i like holding the camera really high or really low and checking out the back screen...impossible to do with a standard finder.
remember when one of the features of a pro camera was the ability to take off the finder and just look at the screen for overhead shots?
such creative people and you hold yourselves back!
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
FF and viewfinder...mmmh this is more or less one of two cameras: a Leica M whatever or the small Sony FF. You must be lucky both being able to afford them and living in a place where you can take any of these out everywhere and be safe with them. Where I live I wouldn't really test my luck too much with any of them in the street...
GLF
SausalitoDog
Well-known
There is definitely a time and place for the LCD to frame, such as the angle that is so low you can't get your eye low enough or so high you can't look in
Also the use of wide angle lenses primarily excuses a lot of instability, but the old saw that you use your forehead and both arms as a tripod for stability just makes so much more sense than extending the lens away from your body on a fulcrum that magnifies any shake!
At least for me
Also the use of wide angle lenses primarily excuses a lot of instability, but the old saw that you use your forehead and both arms as a tripod for stability just makes so much more sense than extending the lens away from your body on a fulcrum that magnifies any shake!
At least for me
Frida
Established
I also only buy and use cameras with viewfinders (except for the occasional picture with my phone). If you gave me an Rx1 free of charge, I'd thank you, sell it, and buy something like an x100s instead. No viewfinder = no game.
May I ask where you live?
Jan Pedersen
Well-known
I can't afford a Range finder with a FF sensor either why my RF are film only.
When prices drop on RF cameras with a FF sensor like they have on DSLR's i might get one, until then i am happy with my D800 and my film cameras.
A VF it must have and i don't feel i am missing anything until then.
back alley
IMAGES
i generally don't hold the camera away from me at arm's length...not very productive and it looks goofy to me.
i hold it close to my face, a few inches away i'd guess...except for when i hold it low or high...have you guys ever shot from the hip with your cameras?
i hold it close to my face, a few inches away i'd guess...except for when i hold it low or high...have you guys ever shot from the hip with your cameras?