Bill Pierce
Well-known
In olden days the Speed Graphic had a ground glass, an optical viewfinder and a wireframe “sports finder.” Today’s digital camera can have an LCD screen that is not that different in function from the ground glass. It may have an eye level electronic viewfinder not too different from the Graphic’s optical viewfinder. And if it’s a Leica, Fuji X Pro or you slip an accessory bright frame finder into the accessory shoe a la the early Sigmas, you have the modern equivalent of the Graphic’s sports finder.
But, there seems to be a difference between then and now. News photographers with the Graphic used all the available finders; they had to. The groundglass was the only way to focus a lens that wasn’t linked to the camera’s rangefinder and while the optical viewfinder was accurate, it provided too reduced a view to work as quickly as the wire frame finder in quick breaking situations.
Most of the folks I know tend to use just one of the finder option with today’s digital cameras, the eye level viewfinder. Certainly with a DSLR most folks just use the eye level finder, but I have a friend who is a product photographer who uses the rear screen on the camera body. It makes him more conscious of the framing and what is happening at the periphery of the frame. Mounted on a tripod, it’s almost as if he was using a miniaturized version of an old fashioned view camera. Obviously, this is a technique that would work well for many studio photographers, architectural photographers, landscape photographers, e.t.c.. I have to say, mirror or mirrorless, I’m an eye level viewfinder guy after years of holding 35mm film rangefinders and reflexes up to my eye. Seeing someone use a small digital camera as if it were a small view camera was a bit of a jolt, but when I tried it while making relatively static images, it worked. It was better than the eye level viewfinder.
Most folks don’t use a bright line finders with their digital cameras because the cameras don’t have a bright line finder. Leica, the Fuji X Pro and X100 series and auxiliary finders on Sigma cameras are the only ones that come to mind. I used to shove old Leica auxiliary bright line finders in the accessory shoes in a variety of cameras. The finders serve a purpose in providing a sharp image near to far and allowing you to see outside the frame lines - good for shooting almost anything over which you have little or no control and want to remain as aware as possible of what is happening.
It’s a little late for a New Year’s resolution, but I think I’m going to explore the variety of viewfinder options open to me and not just use the eye level finder. Hardly a life changing journey, but it should be interesting. What do you think?
But, there seems to be a difference between then and now. News photographers with the Graphic used all the available finders; they had to. The groundglass was the only way to focus a lens that wasn’t linked to the camera’s rangefinder and while the optical viewfinder was accurate, it provided too reduced a view to work as quickly as the wire frame finder in quick breaking situations.
Most of the folks I know tend to use just one of the finder option with today’s digital cameras, the eye level viewfinder. Certainly with a DSLR most folks just use the eye level finder, but I have a friend who is a product photographer who uses the rear screen on the camera body. It makes him more conscious of the framing and what is happening at the periphery of the frame. Mounted on a tripod, it’s almost as if he was using a miniaturized version of an old fashioned view camera. Obviously, this is a technique that would work well for many studio photographers, architectural photographers, landscape photographers, e.t.c.. I have to say, mirror or mirrorless, I’m an eye level viewfinder guy after years of holding 35mm film rangefinders and reflexes up to my eye. Seeing someone use a small digital camera as if it were a small view camera was a bit of a jolt, but when I tried it while making relatively static images, it worked. It was better than the eye level viewfinder.
Most folks don’t use a bright line finders with their digital cameras because the cameras don’t have a bright line finder. Leica, the Fuji X Pro and X100 series and auxiliary finders on Sigma cameras are the only ones that come to mind. I used to shove old Leica auxiliary bright line finders in the accessory shoes in a variety of cameras. The finders serve a purpose in providing a sharp image near to far and allowing you to see outside the frame lines - good for shooting almost anything over which you have little or no control and want to remain as aware as possible of what is happening.
It’s a little late for a New Year’s resolution, but I think I’m going to explore the variety of viewfinder options open to me and not just use the eye level finder. Hardly a life changing journey, but it should be interesting. What do you think?
Baby of Macon
Well-known
I've been resolutely an eye level finder photographer. However, in situations where focus is absolutely critical and especially when using the Nikon D800E on a tripod, I find focusing with live view invaluable. My most recent photograph in the gallery is a case in point - shot at night on a 25 second exposure - impossible to focus accurately in the viewfinder. However, I would always use the OVF if I wasn't using a tripod as I can't see how one can hold a camera steady if only braced with two arms - as opposed two arms and one's head.
aoresteen
Well-known
I just picked up an Olympus Vari-Magni finder for my OM cameras. I looking forward to seeing if it works ok with the camera on a tripod.
Timmyjoe
Veteran
Years ago I purchased a Rolleiflex. It was the first camera I ever had that I didn't look "thru". I found it very disconcerting, more so with the "move the camera left, the image moved left, move camera right, image moved right". Couldn't get used to it at the time so I sold it.
I think I'll always be more comfortable looking "thru" a camera when shooting. With my underwater rig I have no choice but to focus and frame via the rear LCD, but it's not as comfortable for me as looking thru the camera. I think it might also have something to do with having the camera right up against my face and having it move with my head as I look over a scene.
I think I'll always be more comfortable looking "thru" a camera when shooting. With my underwater rig I have no choice but to focus and frame via the rear LCD, but it's not as comfortable for me as looking thru the camera. I think it might also have something to do with having the camera right up against my face and having it move with my head as I look over a scene.
cz23
-
I enjoy using the LCD on my GR for street shooting. I often hold it a chest level or lower because I prefer that angle of view. The angle is such that I may trigger the shutter with my thumb. It also seems more stable to me, with the upper arms against the body. Of course, if you've got a flip screen, all the better.
I find the main limtation is that the small screen doesn't provide a very good view of detail - small gestures, eyes, etc. It's more of a gross compositional tool.
If the situation allows, I'll frame with the LCD held low, then switch to watching the scene develop without looking at the camera. That works pretty well.
With my MM, I really enjoy shooting hyperfocally with a 35mm optical viewfinder. It's so bright and clear compared to the in-camera VF.
Please do share your observations.
John
I find the main limtation is that the small screen doesn't provide a very good view of detail - small gestures, eyes, etc. It's more of a gross compositional tool.
If the situation allows, I'll frame with the LCD held low, then switch to watching the scene develop without looking at the camera. That works pretty well.
With my MM, I really enjoy shooting hyperfocally with a 35mm optical viewfinder. It's so bright and clear compared to the in-camera VF.
Please do share your observations.
John
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I forgot how it is called... Tethering. Same as telecamera signal viewing and control method. Impressive and handy in some situations.
Personally, if camera needs external bright line finder it is wrong camera for me.
But, some guys in film industry told me what some DOP have set of viewfinders to check framing without camera. This one makes sense to me.
Personally, if camera needs external bright line finder it is wrong camera for me.
But, some guys in film industry told me what some DOP have set of viewfinders to check framing without camera. This one makes sense to me.
Oscuro
He's French, I'm Italian.
Bill,
Mme. O here. You and I have been doing something similar for a long time: 4x5 to Leica to something else, etc.
Before zooms got so good, I did the three-bodies-28-50-90/105 dance. But as I moved from rangefinders to reflex, I kept a finder or two in the top of the prism. But I'd use a 35 on the 50 body which gave me the "outside" bits, you know?
Now I'm almost exclusively DSLR. However. For the last eight years its been Nikon's D3 bodies - marvelous. For nearly three years I've been using an X100 alongside the D3.
The X100 is marvelous. Silent. Beautiful color. Shot at high ISO it mushes up reds in an absolutely lovely way.
But the thing I like the most is that I can look through a finder that can be a rangefinderesque affair with brightlines, or I can make that an EVF and it becomes very similar to a reflex camera with precise framing control, and, and! and! the best part!!! I can look at the back of the camera and shoot with excellent control over framing without having the silly thing plastered to my face. Doing that with the D3 is problematic.
The point is: the little digital cameras are direct descendants of view cameras. Even better, they're right way round and right side up! My long-suffering husband showed me that years ago when I made a silly remark that in turn made him push my "purist" buttons!
Stick to your resolutions, Bill!
Mme. O here. You and I have been doing something similar for a long time: 4x5 to Leica to something else, etc.
Before zooms got so good, I did the three-bodies-28-50-90/105 dance. But as I moved from rangefinders to reflex, I kept a finder or two in the top of the prism. But I'd use a 35 on the 50 body which gave me the "outside" bits, you know?
Now I'm almost exclusively DSLR. However. For the last eight years its been Nikon's D3 bodies - marvelous. For nearly three years I've been using an X100 alongside the D3.
The X100 is marvelous. Silent. Beautiful color. Shot at high ISO it mushes up reds in an absolutely lovely way.
But the thing I like the most is that I can look through a finder that can be a rangefinderesque affair with brightlines, or I can make that an EVF and it becomes very similar to a reflex camera with precise framing control, and, and! and! the best part!!! I can look at the back of the camera and shoot with excellent control over framing without having the silly thing plastered to my face. Doing that with the D3 is problematic.
The point is: the little digital cameras are direct descendants of view cameras. Even better, they're right way round and right side up! My long-suffering husband showed me that years ago when I made a silly remark that in turn made him push my "purist" buttons!
Stick to your resolutions, Bill!
pvdhaar
Peter
My first camera was an SLR, and for 20 years I had nothing else. That was how I learned to 'see the world', photographically speaking that is.
Then in the early 2000's I started shooting rangefinders both with built-in and external viewfinders, and notwithstanding how nice projected frame lines are, I just couldn't seem to make photos that are as good as with SLRs. A couple of years back, I picked up mirrorless with EVF, and same story.. The end result is that I've finally completely gravitated back to DSLRs/SLRs; and it was like meeting an old friend, plus my images are as good as they were again.
So, the question is, can you really teach an old dog a new trick?
Then in the early 2000's I started shooting rangefinders both with built-in and external viewfinders, and notwithstanding how nice projected frame lines are, I just couldn't seem to make photos that are as good as with SLRs. A couple of years back, I picked up mirrorless with EVF, and same story.. The end result is that I've finally completely gravitated back to DSLRs/SLRs; and it was like meeting an old friend, plus my images are as good as they were again.
So, the question is, can you really teach an old dog a new trick?
willie_901
Veteran
When my X-T1 is on a tripod I use the often use articulated LCD screen. This saves wear and tear on my back.
For some work I use the Fujifilm Camera Remote App with an iPad. This WiFi based finder option is the ultimate viewfinder option for tripod usage.
Some of my interior photography clients loved walking around the scene viewing staging changes/adjustments in real time while holding the iPad. I liked knowing clients were satisfied before leaving the site as they approved of the shots after viewing a large-sized image. Using Live View and WiFi significantly reduces battery life. I use the Fujifilm VG-XT1 vertical battery grip to double the in-camera battery life. During one three-hour gig I used four batteries. The camera was on constantly. However the WiFi signal is strong. I controlled the camera through two walls in a high-rise condo building with steel (instead of wood) wall framing. Eliminating shadows from a large chandler distant in the frame was tricky. So I optimized the off-camera flash location and angle without returning to the camera for each shot.
For some work I use the Fujifilm Camera Remote App with an iPad. This WiFi based finder option is the ultimate viewfinder option for tripod usage.
Some of my interior photography clients loved walking around the scene viewing staging changes/adjustments in real time while holding the iPad. I liked knowing clients were satisfied before leaving the site as they approved of the shots after viewing a large-sized image. Using Live View and WiFi significantly reduces battery life. I use the Fujifilm VG-XT1 vertical battery grip to double the in-camera battery life. During one three-hour gig I used four batteries. The camera was on constantly. However the WiFi signal is strong. I controlled the camera through two walls in a high-rise condo building with steel (instead of wood) wall framing. Eliminating shadows from a large chandler distant in the frame was tricky. So I optimized the off-camera flash location and angle without returning to the camera for each shot.
JoeV
Thin Air, Bright Sun
I like the EVF on mirrorless cameras like my Lumix G, you get the eye-level advantage in bright sun while being able to see the exact image electronically, just like an LCD.
However, on my Fujifilm X10, the LCD is easily washed out in bright sun and the optical VF is simply terrible, so I use an external Olympus optical VF with a 4:3 aspect ratio frame line, that matches the X10's native aspect ratio with a 35mm equivalent FOV.
So I agree with you, Bill, using a variety of viewing methods is a good thing.
~Joe
However, on my Fujifilm X10, the LCD is easily washed out in bright sun and the optical VF is simply terrible, so I use an external Olympus optical VF with a 4:3 aspect ratio frame line, that matches the X10's native aspect ratio with a 35mm equivalent FOV.
So I agree with you, Bill, using a variety of viewing methods is a good thing.
~Joe
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
My first view-only camera was a Ricoh GRDiii in 2011. It was compose by screenview or shoot blind (which of course isn't entirely nuts with 28mm + snap focus; it's the Winograndizing of the modern camera).
But I also liked liked optical VF and embraced digital VF--from Lumix G1 to Fuji X100/XE-- and appreciate hybrid possibilities, especially with persnickety gear in glare or low light.
This is where the modernized hood comes into play. Case in point: Sigma DP Merrill with Hoodman frame mounted via tripod bushing (linked below). Voila, my modern little view camera.
http://roberthilllong.tumblr.com/post/138088499935/view-camera-2016
The cheap pistol grip is also useful handheld or as a mini-tripod. Behold the incredible shrinking view camera!
I also now use a (detached, on a lanyard) Hoodman loupe when I can with the GR. And it is also fun, despite parallax problems, to carry 28 and 35mm OVF when I want to shoot the GR eyelevel among people. Results are slightly more predictable than shooting it blind.
Full disclosure: I photographed the Merrill with a Sony A7 mounting a Contax G 35/2--using the tilt screen to focus. ;-)
But I also liked liked optical VF and embraced digital VF--from Lumix G1 to Fuji X100/XE-- and appreciate hybrid possibilities, especially with persnickety gear in glare or low light.
This is where the modernized hood comes into play. Case in point: Sigma DP Merrill with Hoodman frame mounted via tripod bushing (linked below). Voila, my modern little view camera.
http://roberthilllong.tumblr.com/post/138088499935/view-camera-2016
The cheap pistol grip is also useful handheld or as a mini-tripod. Behold the incredible shrinking view camera!
I also now use a (detached, on a lanyard) Hoodman loupe when I can with the GR. And it is also fun, despite parallax problems, to carry 28 and 35mm OVF when I want to shoot the GR eyelevel among people. Results are slightly more predictable than shooting it blind.
Full disclosure: I photographed the Merrill with a Sony A7 mounting a Contax G 35/2--using the tilt screen to focus. ;-)
Out to Lunch
Ventor
As said above, in bright light, especially with the sun in your back, a fixed screen easily washes out. It's easier with an articulated screen. As willie 901, I am now also using the Fuji remote app but with a Samsung Note 4 phone, which has a 5.7 inch screen. On the same phone I also loaded a light meter app.
Ronald M
Veteran
I dad panos with a P&S rear screen, dark cloth over my head, mounted to a heavy European wood tripod I usually use for 4x5.
Got strange looks, but the pano was fine.
use live view to set up my focus fine tune on Nikons DSLR. The 100% optical one on pro Nikons seems sufficient.
Wide lens on a Digital Leica Scream for live view which is always perfect.
Got strange looks, but the pano was fine.
use live view to set up my focus fine tune on Nikons DSLR. The 100% optical one on pro Nikons seems sufficient.
Wide lens on a Digital Leica Scream for live view which is always perfect.
pluton
Well-known
Once the rear LCD gains tilting or articulating action, it becomes very useful. If the makers would add a daylight visible LCD display (the kind that are not as color accurate but much brighter), it'd be even better.
Otherwise, I'll just look into the hole.
Brightline finders would be nice---I have 'em---but the focus-by-wire on my Fuji-X does not have dependable repeatability in relation to the focus marks on the lens barrel.
Otherwise, I'll just look into the hole.
Brightline finders would be nice---I have 'em---but the focus-by-wire on my Fuji-X does not have dependable repeatability in relation to the focus marks on the lens barrel.
Richard G
Veteran
Saw a 1950s photo of Bardot: one of the many photographers in the room held his Rolleiflex out in front with just his right hand, on the shutter release, short neck strap on full stretch, big flash reflector in his left hand and framing through the sports finder option of the Rolleiflex hood. Impressive. I use all three options with the X100, the rear screen especially with macro. External finders are great for speed. I've even used my SBOOI 50mm finder with the M9, but maybe that was because I hate the M9's ambiguous and deficient 50 frame lines.
bmattock
Veteran
Perhaps it would be possible to reconfigure the LCD to display upside-down and backwards, so it would be more like a LF ground glass.
