If your camera has an EVF how much do you actually use it?

[cameron2]

Close to 100%. On the GX7, I only use the LCD to compose when the positioning of the camera is such that I cannot use the EVF.

 

[JohnLock]

I consider a built-in EVF essential, and use it probably more than 50% of the time, e.g in bright sunshine, almost always for telephoto work, and in WA landscapes when not truing to capture the near fore-ground. But I really like-- and use the tilting LCD for low angle and close to ground shots. The EVF, LCD, and tilting LCD all compliment each other. I use EM1 and EM10 bodies.

JL

 

[Mike Ronesia]

Almost 100%.

Actually, I could not fully adjust to using LCD on GM1 which I bought as a second body, and this was one of the reasons I sold it.

My wife gives me a funny look, every time I put the GM1 up against my face. I use the EVF on my GH3 almost always. I wear reading glasses and hate messing with them when shooting, so much easier to just use the dialed in EVF.

 

[Corkcampbell]

EVF 100% of the time, with all of my cameras except a DP2M which doesn't have an EVF. That includes chimping.

--
"Knowledge is good." Emil Faber

 

[ShutterNot]

100% EVF with a diopter.

Only time I might use a flip out LCD is very low to the ground or when I have to hold camera in a position where I can't look through EVF.

 

[WW Webster]

100%

 

[Marsupialmouse]

I have a couple of manual focus lenses and find it impossible to focus without the EVF, similarly, for macro shots, I find I can be much more accurate with my focus point and composition with the EVF. For more distant subjects and AF I often use the LCD though.

 

[LeeS]

I find the EVF to be preferable in bright sunlight (as many have mentioned), for steady handholding of long lenses, and for following action.

However, composing on the LCD is superior in my hands for eye level shots of children (while maintaining eye contact) and for close ups (especially at ground level). In both cases it beats the heck out of getting down on my knees. LCD also works better for most video and when one wants to shoot inconspicuously.

It is wonderful that we have a system in which we can choose either option with no compromise of autofocus speed or accuracy.

Lee

 

[alcelc]

I'm in my 50's & grew using 35mm SLR's. & using a viewfinder to frame my shots 100% of the time. Friday I went to the NJ Botanical Garden. I spend a couple of hours there & got tons of really nice images. I took around 150 images & only needed to use the EVF for about 10 images. Also in the places that I needed to use the EVF I adjusted my LCD from my -1 setting and bumped that up & found out had I done this originally I would of been able to get the same images without needing an EVF at all. Also I never use the EVF indoors. The only time I use the EVF's on my camera's are on really sunny days depending on the angle of the sun. Having said that I like having an EVF because it's quicker to use than having to adjust the LCD brightness. But I can see the day when a more advance LCD/OLED screen will be able to adjust bright enough on it's auto setting and will completely kill off the use of the EVF.

99% except on tripod. Back to the day of using the fixed evf of G1, a fully articulated LCD would be more convenience while shooting overhead, or shooting low. Now having the titling external evf to my GX1, evf becomes even more usable.

IMHO, evf style holding would be more steady, easier to see under sun and could better monitoring of the real time life view changes while setting the perimeters. It is one of the advantages of mirrorless over Dslr that ovf users have to review their result after the shot, if fail, try again. We could see the result before shooting. Peeping through the smaller evf would not only let us have more clear sight, but would also make us more concentrate on our shoot.

I'm both of presbyopia and short sighted. If using the LCD, I need to put on and off my short sighted spectacle to focus on the LCD. An evf would be more kind to me. I just have to correct evf for my near sighted vision while wearing short sighted spectacle, I could then see clearly through my evf with my spectacle on.

Finally, this question is interesting because people using newer models of panny might trend to find evf more usable than oly users. Would it be because of the distinct TOUCH PAD feature of panny making the simultaneous usage of both evf and LCD possible.

 

[lambert4]

And if a simple port was designed for me to dock my camera on at home similar to sigma lens dock for deeper menu settings and and adjusting mysets in advance. I Could do without the LCD.

--
Here's to learning something new everyday, and remembering it the next.

 

[eques]

The EVF is my default choice. I use the LCD for low or high angle shots. I also use it when taking pictures of a person or pet that is uncomfortable with someone looking at them through a viewfinder.

I prefer the EVF because it works better in bright light and makes for a more stable camera position with long lenses. It also helps me see what the camera sees instead of what my eyes are seeing.

The future is good for EVFs. At some point there is a limit to how much detail you can see on a 3 inch LCD no matter how high the resolution of the screen is, particularly as you get older. A very high resolution EVF can be made to appear much larger and make better use of a high pixel count. With good viewfinder optics a 4K EVF would show a lot more detail than I will ever be able to see on a 3 inch LCD of any resolution. The difference is not really substantial at this point but as viewfinder resolution increases it will be.

+1

 

[Gato Amarillo]

What I'd really love to compose with tbh is something akin to large format ground glass.

Have you ever actually used a naked ground glass viewfinder? The image is rather dim and washed out unless you use a focusing hood. Not to mention inverted or (for waist level finders) reversed.

There are optical viewers you can attach to large format cameras, but as soon as you do that then you're basically right back to where you started from in terms of the viewing experience.

I spent a lot of time with view cameras - doesn't take long at all to get used to the inverted image. And at one time I could follow action pretty well with the reversed view of a waist-level medium format finder - maybe not fast sports action, but normal street movement.

My newest Panasonic mirrorless will send an image to my tablet right side up and right way round. On the 7-inch tablet the image is comparable in size to a 4x5 view camera, with the rest of the screen used for camera controls including shutter button, exposure controls and the like. I suppose a person could work up a bracket to hold camera and tablet to get somewhat like Dheorl's idea.

Not to mention the Sony cameras that clip to a cell phone:

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

Gato

 

[MatsP]

Almost always. I use the screen only when I'm too lazy kneeling down for a flower or something else down on the ground, or when I try too shoot over my head in a crowd of people. I think using the evf is very comfortable and feels natural for me, grown up on cameras that all had ovf:s. I had a digital compact for a short time but it always felt ridiculous when holding the camera with straight arms, never got used to it. Still think it looks strange when I see people doing that with their compacts, phones and pads.

 

[VariableScope]

I'm in my 50's & grew using 35mm SLR's. & using a viewfinder to frame my shots 100% of the time. Friday I went to the NJ Botanical Garden. I spend a couple of hours there & got tons of really nice images. I took around 150 images & only needed to use the EVF for about 10 images. Also in the places that I needed to use the EVF I adjusted my LCD from my -1 setting and bumped that up & found out had I done this originally I would of been able to get the same images without needing an EVF at all. Also I never use the EVF indoors. The only time I use the EVF's on my camera's are on really sunny days depending on the angle of the sun. Having said that I like having an EVF because it's quicker to use than having to adjust the LCD brightness. But I can see the day when a more advance LCD/OLED screen will be able to adjust bright enough on it's auto setting and will completely kill off the use of the EVF.

GX7 screen is really good. I'd say I use the EVF maybe 60% of the time, with the screen for the rest particularly for video I find.

 

[thxbb12]

I always use the EVF. I just hate composing on the LCD screen, plus it's not stable at all.

I often use shallow DOF and with the LCD it's easy to be out of focus because of the wobbly position.

Finally, I have yet to see an LCD screen that's usable when it's sunny outside.

To summarize: I never use the LCD except when I'm shooting landscapes on a tripod and I can't peak through the EVF.

--

Florent
http://capturedbyflo.com
http://flickr.com/photos/thxbb12/

 

[jim stirling]

only when I can't see through the view finder easily, if I have to use the LCD, then I have to get out the reading glasses, which is a pain in the *ss, but being able to touch the screen to trigger the shot without jiggling the tripod, instead of pressing the button is sometimes convenient, even more convenient is when you get the iPhone app and trigger from the phone, but nearly all are looking through the view finder

 

[Polariser]

95%.. Use the screen when I need to tilt it

 

[Hen3ry]

But I love the fully articulated screen on my Panny G6.

Cheers, geoff

 

[Ulfric M Douglas]

....

If it has an EVF I will use the EVF up to 100% of the time : a few frames might be taken without looking, a few frames might need the LCD, in some bizarre position maybe.

 

[gugarci]

Wow, I've never had a thread this busy ever!!!!! Thanks for all the replies. After looking back at some of my past images yesterday my EVF usage percentage # was too low. Indoor I'm usually around 90% of the time LCD. Outdoor usage gets more EVF usage but it depends on the sun. But over-all is still much lower than most of you guys. My realistic # is around 40%-45% EVF usage. But at my last photo outing it was much lower than that.