The death of the optical finder (Page 3): Most of us do that. But it simply does NOT work for those who are: 1. irrationally prejudiced against EVF. 2. have never owned or tried one.

User ID

jlg1000 wrote:

You can also press the camera to your face using an electronic view finder...

Most of us do that. But it simply does NOT work for those who are:
1. irrationally prejudiced against EVF.
2. have never owned or tried one.
3. needing to post their cluelessness.
4. all of the above.

radiojohn

I think there was a heavy dose of price points involved.

radiojohn

My original comment was about the demise of the OPTICAL viewfinder. Nothing against EVFs, etc. I still maintain that, outside, it is not possible to carefully compose an image with a rear-screen ONLY camera.

I am especially puzzled by bridge cameras with zooms to (equiv) 500mm+ with ONLY a rear screen.

jlg1000 Loc: Uruguay / South America

radiojohn wrote:

My original comment was about the demise of the OPTICAL viewfinder. Nothing against EVFs, etc. I still maintain that, outside, it is not possible to carefully compose an image with a rear-screen ONLY camera.

I am especially puzzled by bridge cameras with zooms to (equiv) 500mm+ with ONLY a rear screen.

It's a matter of cost.

Bridge cameras are meant to "bridge" the gap between interchangeable lens cameras and point and shoots (or cell phones)

The most expensive part is that massive multi-X zoom... To remain competitive, they have to keep the other costs down. Plastic body, no EVF, small sensor, sometimes no hot shoe, etc.

delder Loc: Maryland

radiojohn wrote:

The ability to see the image clearly on a bright day when the screen is unreadable.

I do agree!
Spent my early years shooting Reflex [Yashicaflex] 120 film .
Graduated to some 35 MM viewfinder cameras.
Got a Fuji SLR then graduated [?]
To a Nikon F4004.
When the music died
[ Film/Processing out of reach]
I switched to a series of small Digital pocket cameras, small sensor & 3x or so zoom for years.
After the first couple, they ALL lacked any optical viewfinder and were difficult to frame in bright sunlight.
Just got a used D3100 a couple of years ago and really enjoy looking through the glass again!

radiojohn

While not the best lenses made, the little Canon A1200 & A1600 had optical finders. At around $99 they gave up modes and manual, but offered a "live view" on the rear screen where you could adjust color/contrast/hue (assuming you could see the screen.) 12&16 MP and about $30 if you can find one.

User ID

radiojohn wrote:

While not the best lenses made, the little Canon A1200 & A1600 had optical finders. At around $99 they gave up modes and manual, but offered a "live view" on the rear screen where you could adjust color/contrast/hue (assuming you could see the screen.) 12&16 MP and about $30 if you can find one.

Acoarst for just $30 you cant reasonably expect it to also make phone calls and do your taxes ....

jeffrey8066

A good many on you think that the optical view finder is dead, or will be soon be dead.
But for old school shooters like me they are still a way of life. I have tried using the screen on the back for live view shooting and find that it's not good for use during periods of bright sun. I am at the age where i will not probably not purchase a mirrorless camera.

BebuLamar

radiojohn wrote:

My original comment was about the demise of the OPTICAL viewfinder. Nothing against EVFs, etc. I still maintain that, outside, it is not possible to carefully compose an image with a rear-screen ONLY camera.

I am especially puzzled by bridge cameras with zooms to (equiv) 500mm+ with ONLY a rear screen.

The optical viewfinder is in demise because the mirrorless is taking over but I believe you meant the demis of the eye level viewfinder. I do not think that it is true but I believe that you are against the rear screen as the only type of viewfinder. While many low end cameras as well as the phone only have that but what is really taking place of the optical viewfinder is the eye level EVF and I don't think you're against this.

Soul Dr. Loc: Beautiful Shenandoah Valley

radiojohn wrote:

The ability to see the image clearly on a bright day when the screen is unreadable.

Get a mirrorless camera with a EVF. Problem solved. I very seldom use the LCD screen on my mirrorless cameras.

will

Bill_de Loc: US

jeffrey8066 wrote:

A good many on you think that the optical view finder is dead, or will be soon be dead.
But for old school shooters like me they are still a way of life. I have tried using the screen on the back for live view shooting and find that it's not good for use during periods of bright sun. I am at the age where i will not probably not purchase a mirrorless camera.

When I got my Zfc I never thought about using the rear screen for picture taking. It didn't take long to realize that I could use the viewfinder for whatever menu items I use. I don't need a protector for the rear screen because it
flips over and folds in against the camera back. The camera now has a better retro look than the Nikon Df.

Oh, as an aside, it also does a nice job taking pictures.

----

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

radiojohn wrote:

I've got a couple of modern mirrorless cameras with rather good EVFs and two bridge cameras with so-so EVFs.
So I get where they offer a lot, especially with focus peaking, etc.

But how did the photo-computer industry convince people that the exclusive use of a screen on the back of a camera (or phone) was all that is needed to compose an image? Does nobody use cameras in broad daylight? To make matters worse, many controls are on the same touch screen.

I was a happy Canon user about ten years ago when both Sony and Canon had MILCs without viewfinders. Neither one was very successful. Canon introduced an EOS-M2 in Asia only, and gradually each brand reached the conclusion that a MILC needed an EVF to succeed. Pentax also released the K-01 and the small-sensored “Q” series about the same time. Neither had a viewfinder, and neither succeeded. Instead of adding an EVF, Pentax decided “MILC is not for us”, and gave up.

Pentax is the one brand which has stood by the optical viewfinder.

niteman3d Loc: South Central Pennsylvania, USA

Hoodman or clone is the answer for reflective situations?

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

jeffrey8066 wrote:

A good many on you think that the optical view finder is dead, or will be soon be dead.
But for old school shooters like me they are still a way of life. I have tried using the screen on the back for live view shooting and find that it's not good for use during periods of bright sun. I am at the age where i will not probably not purchase a mirrorless camera.

The EVF is live view, you hold it up to your eye and use it just like an OVF that you use.
Sun is not an issue.
EVFs, until a couple of years ago, were also not good either because of image lag. But that is pretty much resolved now and is hard to detect.
It took many years to get there but it finally has arrived.

Bill_de Loc: US

Architect1776 wrote:

The EVF is live view, you hold it up to your eye and use it just like an OVF that you use.
Sun is not an issue.
EVFs, until a couple of years ago, were also not good either because of image lag. But that is pretty much resolved now and is hard to detect.
It took many years to get there but it finally has arrived.

When image lag was an issue, was it only the viewfinder, or did it effect the rear screen image as well?

---