Reading mode: Light Dark

5D2 SLR - is the SLR dead? Who uses the viefinder and why?

Go to last post
M

Marcus A Hunter

New member
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello, this is my first post on the forum and I must say I have enjoyed reading comments and discussions for some time.

Over the weekend, I had a debate with family and friends on the true value of a SLR on todays technology. Please let me explain.

Coming from the film era, a SLR provided the user with the ability to compose, focus, check DOF etc. and this was necessary as it was the only way to see how the camera was configured to capture the image. The actual results were not known until after film processing and printing, and this often took days. (although we did have confidence that using this technique our images were as we intended)

Today, with small high resolution image displays present on the back of most cameras, what is the benefit to using a small viewfinder that does not accurately display the camera field of view or allow for split focussing. To view live, or review post image capture is almost instant. If its not what you wanted, it can be taken again immediatly. (yes with some shots you only get one chance)

A SLR involves many additional moving parts and room in the body to allow us to view an image. Are we in fact paying for technology in these cameras that is not necessary for us today to take and confirm we have the image we are after?

What is the Future of the SLR? wuill it become a high quality P&S?

Does anyone else find they are using the viewfinder less and less?

Given we now have 10x magnification of the rear screen to validate focus and DOF is as we want it when we go manual, other than an ingrained and long practised method of photography involving holding the camera to our eye to capture an image, and the stability we have all learnt from photography in that position, I'm thinking the viewfinder is becoming obsolete. Does anyone see this a different way?

regards

Marcus
 
Try using a point and shoot in the sun and see how successful that is. Of course there will always be a demand and functional use for DSLRs. Nearly all of those on the market today have capacities that far exceed the average point and shoot in addition to possessing larger sensors that can render excellent print images. That said, there are a few, very few point and shoots that can approach the image generating quality of DSLRs.

Of course, many are not interested in print capability beyond snapshot size, and the point and shoots do well, in fact exceed most film cameras today.

All depends what your interest is, but to be sure, DSLRs are here to stay for a long time.
--
Rich N.
 
While I agree the split prism feature in film SLR's of yester-year were great the technology used to capture stunning images has evolved to the digital slr. Despite not having a split focus screen I still only rarely use the live view feature. The technique of putting the Canon to your head (ok, any SLR but it sounds cooler if you throw Canon in there) really can't be replicated. The additional stability of a third point of contact for the camera is still very important. Liveview for me is fine for many landscapes I do or as a last resort for any awkward positions where I cannot get my body positioned ideally.

You are right too when you say we can review and in many cases retake the image if we were not satisified with the result we saw almost instantaneously on the rear LCD - but that is just evolution. It is a great feature and I guess it could make us a little lazy about some of the shots we take but that is all good in my eyes.

As for the future, I don't know where DSLRs are going or what other amazing features we will see but I think I will enjoy the ride!
Marcus A Hunter said:
Hello, this is my first post on the forum and I must say I have enjoyed reading comments and discussions for some time.

Over the weekend, I had a debate with family and friends on the true value of a SLR on todays technology. Please let me explain.

Coming from the film era, a SLR provided the user with the ability to compose, focus, check DOF etc. and this was necessary as it was the only way to see how the camera was configured to capture the image. The actual results were not known until after film processing and printing, and this often took days. (although we did have confidence that using this technique our images were as we intended)

Today, with small high resolution image displays present on the back of most cameras, what is the benefit to using a small viewfinder that does not accurately display the camera field of view or allow for split focussing. To view live, or review post image capture is almost instant. If its not what you wanted, it can be taken again immediatly. (yes with some shots you only get one chance)

A SLR involves many additional moving parts and room in the body to allow us to view an image. Are we in fact paying for technology in these cameras that is not necessary for us today to take and confirm we have the image we are after?

What is the Future of the SLR? wuill it become a high quality P&S?

Does anyone else find they are using the viewfinder less and less?

Given we now have 10x magnification of the rear screen to validate focus and DOF is as we want it when we go manual, other than an ingrained and long practised method of photography involving holding the camera to our eye to capture an image, and the stability we have all learnt from photography in that position, I'm thinking the viewfinder is becoming obsolete. Does anyone see this a different way?

regards

Marcus
Click to expand...
 
Thanks Rich for the quick response, I agree with your comments and that the IQ from the DSLR far exceeds the P&S. This topic is really about the Viewfinder. It we didn't have one, and the supporting mirror that needs to flip up, we could have live view all the time and to my eyes a better view of what the camera is going to capture in real time. I could see however that we would need a shield around the back screen so it could be viewed in most environments.

The problem is holding the DSLR infront of you so you do get a good view of the back screen. A feat almost impossible without a tripod or monopod as mentioned by another member.

It will be interesting to see where the technology and design goes over time. Thanks for your input to this discussion.
 
My favorite cameras are view cameras, and viewing, composing, and focusing the upside down image on the big ground glass focusing screen is a joyful activity for me personally.With live view, I feel like I'm using a mini view camera, but like the real thing its a pita to focus without a dark cloth when its bright out.So I hope the viewfinder doesn't go away myself.Its nice to have both options.
--



http://www.pbase.com/cloudswimmer/image/77798595/original
http://www.pbase.com/cloudswimmer/image/54638350/original
http://www.pbase.com/cloudswimmer/image/53748575/original
http://www.pbase.com/cloudswimmer/image/94669213/original
http://www.pbase.com/cloudswimmer/image/54649538/original
 
As someone that has used many, many P&S and several brands of SLR with Live View, I would be loath to by a topline camera without a viewfinder.
A viewfinder, on the other hand, INSTANTLY validates focus.

While the 5D MK II screen is incredibly dense, it still cannot match a viewfinder for quickly validating focus. Moreover, the viewfinder is a part of the camera/photographer steadying technique. Holding the camera out in front of you just doesn't have the stability that holding the camera up close to your face does.

I use Live View for relatively stationary objects only. And, even then it is difficult to use outdoors. The ONLY benefit that I see is the ability to ZOOM in using digital zoom in Live View. But, even that is suspect at times.

I've shot video a LOT longer than I've shot digital still images, going back to the Sony CV-2110 and AV-3400 around 1968. ( "Have Tape Will Ravel!" )

http://www.labguysworld.com/Sony_TCV-2110.htm
http://www.labguysworld.com/Sony_AV-3400.htm

When shooting from a tripod, using the viewfinder is better with video. But, for hand holding a video camera, nothing beats going back to the viewfinder. And, video viewfinders can't begn to compare to an SLR's viewfinder.

--
http://focusonliberty.blogspot.com
 
...the "R" of DSLR might go away.

There are important ergonomic reasons why removable-lensed handheld cameras of the 35mm form factor will retain an eye-level viewfinder. It's difficult to maintain a view of fast action with a long lens unless you've got the camera physically fitted as a unit to your head (or to your shoulders and you're moving your head as a unit with yours shoulders).

However, within the next 5 to 10 years, cameras are likely to abandon the optical pipe eyelevel viewfinder in favor of a view-by-wire eye level viewfinder system.

--
RDKirk
'TANSTAAFL: The only unbreakable rule in photography.'
 
...and put it on your 5D2?

--
RDKirk
'TANSTAAFL: The only unbreakable rule in photography.'
 
I think eventually we will be going digital viewfinder and no longer be slr glass, they've all been working on it for some time. but speed, resolution is just not there yet.

Someday we will look in a viewfinder at a lcd screen and beable to zoom in and out on a focus point like we do with live view.

It's just a matter of time.
 
The bridge cameras have mostly done away with optical viewfinders, and you get an LCD screen tucked away in the viewfinder. It gives you the advantages of liveview and of holding it to your eye and of not having sun shining on it and no mirror vibration or lag and seeing a picture in very low light.

So far, the good optical viewfinders on DSLRs are still much better as far as I'm concerned, you get a better "visual" feeling and no picture lag, but it's quite possible that the evolutions from bridge cameras and the micro 4/3 cameras mays produce a DSLR sized pro camera (it won't be called a DSLR if it doesn't have a mirror!) with an EVF (electronic viewfinder) that will shake up the next generation of pro gear.

I wouldn't mind betting that some of the manufacturers have already got prototypes on the go. If they can squeeze in a very fast high res screen into the box, many will go for it.

There are already viewfinders available that you stick over you lcd screen to use that as your main viewfinder, which are today aimed at filmmakers using DSLRs, but may well end up being used by many photographers... (the cost of 100-200USD is not much compared with the cost of a 5D2 or 1Dmk4).

The only things that need to be ensured are acceptable internal screen quality and speed, sensors that cope with much heavier use, and reliable and fast focussing. The rest is easy.
 
We posted at the same time!
huser said:
I think eventually we will be going digital viewfinder and no longer be slr glass, they've all been working on it for some time. but speed, resolution is just not there yet.

Someday we will look in a viewfinder at a lcd screen and beable to zoom in and out on a focus point like we do with live view.
Click to expand...
My five-year-old bridge camera does that !
 
RDKirk said:
...and put it on your 5D2?

--
RDKirk
'TANSTAAFL: The only unbreakable rule in photography.'
Click to expand...
Actually, Quietworks makes their blackjacket focus cloth in a 35mm version as pictured here..I have their excellent 8x10 and 4x5 cloths, but for my dslr's I just wear an extra large black t-shirt over my regular one, and pull it up inside out and drape it over the camera when needed.Their 35mm cloth is just too cumbersome for a camera format that is suppose to be light and nimble :)



--



http://www.pbase.com/cloudswimmer/image/77798595/original
http://www.pbase.com/cloudswimmer/image/54638350/original
http://www.pbase.com/cloudswimmer/image/53748575/original
http://www.pbase.com/cloudswimmer/image/94669213/original
http://www.pbase.com/cloudswimmer/image/54649538/original
 
Focus is way to slow when using live view for a lot of applications, I use it a lot but there are plenty of times when its of no use, mostly when tracking, maybe one day when that type of focus improves or we get some new technology. but thats a long way off.

Ross
--
Image's In Light
http://rossmurphy.zenfolio.com/
http://imagesinlightnw.blogspot.com/
 
Marcus A Hunter said:
To view live, or review post image capture is almost instant. If its not what you wanted, it can be taken again immediatly. (yes with some shots you only get one chance)
Click to expand...
You answered that one yourself. There's no way you could replace optical viewfinder with current live view -technology for action photography. It is not even close.
Marcus A Hunter said:
I'm thinking the viewfinder is becoming obsolete. Does anyone see this a different way?
Click to expand...
Back lcd -screen is eating a lot of battery power. At remote locations that is a major concern, since you don't want to carry a bulk of multiple batteries or then have no facilities to charge batteries all the time.

Live view is a fantastic feature and I'm using it a lot with macro etc. But for what we have now, I really prefer to have both options!

--
http://www.jussivakkala.com
 
complete with the big black cloth that the photographer ducks under, but that is not my dream. I take 99% plus of my photos with the viewfinder. When using live view outside, I invariably must use the big black cloth so that I can see the image well enough to obtain a precise focus. The precise focus is, by the way, THE reason to use live view. If you think that serious photographers are holding the camera at arm's length to compose a picture in the LCD, you don't know very much about photography. If you are looking through a viewfinder, you absolutely want to have an optical view. You DO NOT want an electronic viewfinder with its limited resolution inserted into the viewing process.
 
Try shooting a football game using live view. Let me know how that works out for you.

EVF is the future, not the present for sports photography.
--
-------------------------------------------------
'Hit Refresh if pix do not appear. Flaky ISP at work.'

 
But isn't the focussing-systems of dslR (emphasis on R ;-)) relying on the mirror, since it uses some prisms and stuff tu calculate the mis-focus, and not guess it (and re-guess, and re-guess ...) like contrast based methods do?
That should be the reason why dslr can focus so much faster.

Oh, yes, and I want canon to reintroduce split screens for manual focus ... but there life-view might come handy ...
--
http://www.holger-urbanek.de/
 
Use of the rear panel LCD won't ever replace a viewfinder for me for all the reasons that have been mentioned - difficulty of use in bright light, awkwardness of handling at arms length, battery drain. I bought the fairly poor accessory electronic finder for my GF1 because I found it too tough to use with rear panel alone.

Even current "high resolution" viewfinders are very low resolution compared to an optical viewfinder SLR, and the dynamic range is extremely limited - meaning it's tough to see details in bright or dark areas of the scene. For me they have a long, long way to go before they become a viable alternative.

Kevin
 
The LCD is a much better tool than I had thought it was...I thought live view would be worthless...but I still use the viewfinder to compose. It's a much better tool for composing. The LCD suffers from numerous limitations. It does great for critical focus but for speed its no good, and just generally composing seeing the actual scene is much easier and more accurate.
--
d e s o l a t e | m e t r o p o l i s
http://www.desolatemetropolis.com
 
I use both depending on what I am shooting. When using manual focus lenses such as the Zeiss 85mm 1.4 ZE, I use Live View but specifically in Movie Mode. This is a must as this lens, while brilliant, has an inherent focus shift problem. In Movie Mode, I can focus accurately with the lens stopped down to the desired aperture. This is by far the most accurate method of focusing any lens - even more critical given the 21mp of the 5DMkII. For quick action shots, nothing beats the viewfinder. However, the best of both worlds will have to be EVFs for sure. Thats my thinking anyway.

Marcus
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top