The ideal viewfinder?

Perhaps this is the ideal viewfinder:


Magnification: 1.000
Brightness: identical to scene
Contrast ratio: identical to scene
Color rendition of scene: perfect

Best regards,

Doug

Doug Kerr said:

....
Color rendition of scene: perfect...

Click to expand...

Unless one suffers from an eye disease such as Daltonism.

Hi, Cem,

Cem_Usakligil said:

Unless one suffers from an eye disease such as Daltonism.

Click to expand...

Is another kind of finder better for bilateral deuteranopes?

Best regards,

Doug

One problem with such a finder is its retention of peripheral awareness. Thus the user of a camera with such a finder may abandon what might otherwise have been a perfectly visualized shot that could have been grabbed before the errant volleyball struck.

Best regards,

Doug

I believe that you are being facetious, Doug. The truth is that there have been various framing devices used in photography, each with their advantages and disadvantages. The truth is also that some photographers tend to prefer one of these devices at the exclusion of the others, think about Leica M users in the 80s' and how they insisted that nobody could do any street photography but with a rangefinder.

I make no mystery of my dislike of the EVF. I tolerate it in a small camera but I find that it uses more batteries, has poor contrast and resolution (which is a consequence of my higher than normal visual acuity), is difficult to use in bright sunlight and blinds me at night. Its bigger advantage for most of its fan seem to be that it can display a wealth of info in addition to the picture, and I don't want that.


But if other photographers prefer it, more power to them…

This is indeed an ideal viewfinder and that principle worked well for rifles and even for landing planes on aircraft carriers, where one lines up fiduciary points in space. That's how Apollo 13 crew lined up earth without any computers, just referencing the module's window with the blue marble in the distance.

These excel in concentrating on what you MUST hit. The rangefinder viewfinder also includes what is nearby to be included or excluded. That has advantages to some, but not essential to others. The ability of optical and EVF viewfinders to add shot information is a blessing and a curse, but one folk today take for granted, assuming it's no practical distraction to the art of photography.

Visually EVF's aren't up to stellar optics, for me too, neither, but it makes cameras more portable and that's good enough for me!

Asher

For me the answer is - it depends.
The ideal viewfinder for what?
There are situations where a waist-level viewfinder is the best tool,
There are other situations where other types of viewfinders have their distinct advantages and drawbacks.
There are even situations where an EVF is the best solution for safety reasons - think strong light sources aka never try to look into the sun with a tele lens and an OVF or be careful with an OVF in a club during a laser show...
For macro a tilted screen can be very useful.

There is no 'one size fits it all'.

Last week I looked through the EVF of the E-M1.
The E-M5 is already not bad, but the difference here is visible - literally.

It is still a tool...

Best regards,
Michael

Michael Nagel said:

There are even situations where an EVF is the best solution for safety reasons - think strong light sources aka never try to look into the sun with a tele lens and an OVF or be careful with an OVF in a club during a laser show...


Best regards,
Michael

Click to expand...

What? …EVF for high contrast? …that's a joke isn't it? …Use your LV with back screen you are much better off… there is no circumstance that EVF is (or will ever be) of benefit to assist a good photograph… there are cases that the damage is of lesser value or (some of limited percentage) of no value, but "being better off with EVF"… That is like saying that "love" can be replaced with….. yes "this"!

This is with OVF by the way… good quality OVFs (and good quality lens coatings) do filter direct sun… Zeiss are the master of it! You would be unable to judge anything in the shot if one used a silly EVF against the sun… this shot can't be made by using an EVF...



P.S: I was waiting for ages against the sun till that bloody pigeon entered the scene at the lower left end! …bloody bird! …move your ass!

Theodoros Fotometria said:

What? …EVF for high contrast? …that's a joke isn't it? …Use your LV with back screen you are much better off… there is no circumstance that EVF is (or will ever be) of benefit to assist a good photograph… there are cases that the damage is of lesser value or (some of limited percentage) of no value, but "being better off with EVF"… That is like saying that "love" can be replaced with….. yes "this"!

Click to expand...

You seem to understand what suits you - try solar photography with your naked eye using an OVF and a telephoto lens - stare into the sun and come back to repeat what you wrote.
I know of several cases where camera sensors were damaged during a laser show - you can have the same effect to your eye.

Stay on your monologue - this is no discussion...

Best regards,
Michael

Michael Nagel said:

You seem to understand what suits you - try solar photography with your naked eye using an OVF and a telephoto lens - stare into the sun and come back to repeat what you wrote.
I know of several cases where camera sensors were damaged during a laser show - you can have the same effect to your eye.

Stay on your monologue - this is no discussion...

Best regards,
Michael

Click to expand...

I want you focused here Michael! …Are you gonna do your solar photography using an EVF? …what is the subject that EVF will do better than anything else…? I'm still trying to find ONE out of the million… and still find alternatives! Can you name me one?
…I said before, on the (ultra rare) examples that you brought up, that back screen would be even better… Now you mention solar… what's next? …shooting from spacecraft a loose astronaut against the sun while he looses his life? …That's better done by using LV on camera's back LCD also.

Ho, hum.
Another day, another viewfinder.

Tom dinning said:

Ho, hum.
Another day, another viewfinder.

Click to expand...

Yup - must be a trigger word.

No popcorn, sorry.

Best regards,
Michael

Doug Kerr said:

Perhaps this is the ideal viewfinder:

Magnification: 1.000
Brightness: identical to scene
Contrast ratio: identical to scene
Color rendition of scene: perfect

Best regards,

Doug

Click to expand...

I think that this kind of viewfinder helps the photographer compose while seeing the entire scene, both inside and outside the frame. This way, one has the claimed benefits of the rangefinder but it's even better than that. There's no enclosure. Try it, it's like skinny dipping, nothing between you and the waters that bathe you!

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

I think that this kind of viewfinder helps the photographer compose while seeing the entire scene, both inside and outside the frame. This way, one has the claimed benefits of the rangefinder but it's even better than that. There's no enclosure. Try it, it's like skinny dipping, nothing between you and the waters that bathe you!

Asher

Click to expand...

I used to have a similar thing on my Bronica ETRSi actually, it was called the "action" VF… it had three wires on (one for 50mm, one for 75mm and the third for 150mm), used it three or four times in my 20 years with the ETRSi system… Not bad, but not very useful either, in fact I have a similar one on my current Pentacon Six… it's build in the waist level finder, one can lift a "square cut" of the top cover and there is another cut on the rear cover for the 80mm Biometar Zeiss Jena and thus one can convert the camera into MF rangefinder with the standard lens… Since the thing on both ETRSi or P6 is an eye level one, why shouldn't one use the TTL view instead? …and preserve accurate focus using the screen?

P.S. On the Bronica, there was a small window cut, just above the centre of the screen on the base of the construction, which if one used the split image screen, he could see the split image and perhaps focus… Test it for testing it… you don't want to know the result...

Now… that was my major finder on the ETRS… Don't be fooled, the thing is as big as the camera body without finder… but the view is… "F**k ALL" especially if you combine it with a "Beatie brightscreen"



On my F3s that's what my favour VF was… Beatie with no split image and P2 with 45deg split and the "cross" was my favourite ones out of all my 17 screens I sold the cameras with...



Now, I don't know who copied who… but I miss them both… had all finders and most screens with both systems… damn it… I wish digital would have never been around… This was not aimed to be ever changed… both systems where sold "gradually" after 2004!