Reading mode: Light Dark

DSLR viewfinder sizes

Go to last post
B

Brierfield

Active member
Messages
62
Reaction score
19
Location
The Sunny South, US
I'm currently shooting with a D3200 and really like the results. However, one big negative for me is the tiny viewfinder. For years I shot with a Nikon FE and just recently pulled it out of the closet and WOW - I had forgotten just how big and bright that viewfinder was! I wear glasses, and the FE is sooo much easier to frame through.

I will probably be upgrading next year to the D7100, or whatever replaces the D7000, and my wife will inherit the D3200. I've looked through the D7000 viewfinder, and although is is certainly larger than the D3200's, it's still doesn't seem to be as large as the FE's.

I realize that DSLRs have much more "guts" inside the body than my old FE, but the body of the FE wasn't that large. (I also realize that the D3200 has a pentamirror vs pentaprism). It just seems that Nikon could put such a viewfinder in more of their camera offerings.

In order to get back to the FE-sized viewfinder would I have to step-up to FF in something like a D600? I'm not really sure if I want to make that big of a $$ leap just to get the viewfinder that I want.
 
Brierfield said:
I'm currently shooting with a D3200 and really like the results. However, one big negative for me is the tiny viewfinder. For years I shot with a Nikon FE and just recently pulled it out of the closet and WOW - I had forgotten just how big and bright that viewfinder was! I wear glasses, and the FE is sooo much easier to frame through.

I will probably be upgrading next year to the D7100, or whatever replaces the D7000, and my wife will inherit the D3200. I've looked through the D7000 viewfinder, and although is is certainly larger than the D3200's, it's still doesn't seem to be as large as the FE's.

I realize that DSLRs have much more "guts" inside the body than my old FE, but the body of the FE wasn't that large. (I also realize that the D3200 has a pentamirror vs pentaprism). It just seems that Nikon could put such a viewfinder in more of their camera offerings.

In order to get back to the FE-sized viewfinder would I have to step-up to FF in something like a D600? I'm not really sure if I want to make that big of a $$ leap just to get the viewfinder that I want.
Click to expand...
There are two directions you go, and possibly a third: go full-frame - the only guaranteed way to get a big viewfinder; go mirrorless with a high-res EVF (om-d em-5, nex-6/7); add on a viewfinder magnifier lens. All have their disadvantages.
 
Remember that your FE is a 35mm camera, aka "full frame". The D-3200 is APS-C; significantly smaller than FF. In order for the viewfinder image to look as big as FF it has to have much stronger and larger eyepiece lenses to magnify the image which in turn messes with the size and eyepoint of the OVF. One advantage of mirrorless EVFs is that the larger the LCD, the larger the effective viewfinder image and it is not dependent on the sensor size.
--
Regards, Paul

Lili's Dad
 
I agree as above except that I feel the weedy 0.78/0.80x magnification viewfinders on the lower end Nikon's are worse than they need to be

I've used better ones from other makers..pentamirror or not

Yes you won't get a big VF on any APS-C camera, my 35mm FF SLR's are massive, saying that the better pentraprism VF's in APS-C land are by no means bad really..and a good bit better than the entry price peep holes.
 
mosswings said:
There are two directions you go, and possibly a third: go full-frame - the only guaranteed way to get a big viewfinder; go mirrorless with a high-res EVF (om-d em-5, nex-6/7); add on a viewfinder magnifier lens. All have their disadvantages.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the response!

An EVF is not really an option for me, and I've read that the maginifers are best for close-up/macro work. As I said, I'm not sure that the price/size of FF will be worth it to get the better viewfinder. Perhaps the larger viewfinder of the D7000/D7100 will have to suffice.
 
Thanks, Paul.

Yes, I realized that my FE and the FF cameras shared the 35mm frame size. But, I believe that the D300 has a large viewfinder similar to a FF, and it has an APS-C sensor. So, apparently the sensor size doesn't necessarily constrain the size of the viewfinder?

Perhaps Nikon will offer some smaller camera body in the future that also has a large viewfinder, whether FF or APS-C.
Paul Pasco said:
Remember that your FE is a 35mm camera, aka "full frame". The D-3200 is APS-C; significantly smaller than FF. In order for the viewfinder image to look as big as FF it has to have much stronger and larger eyepiece lenses to magnify the image which in turn messes with the size and eyepoint of the OVF. One advantage of mirrorless EVFs is that the larger the LCD, the larger the effective viewfinder image and it is not dependent on the sensor size.
--
Regards, Paul

Lili's Dad
Click to expand...
 
Brierfield said:
Thanks, Paul.

Yes, I realized that my FE and the FF cameras shared the 35mm frame size. But, I believe that the D300 has a large viewfinder similar to a FF, and it has an APS-C sensor.
Click to expand...
The D300 viewfinder is more or less the same as other Nikon APS-C cameras (excluding the miserable little viewfinders of the entry level models, of course ;-)) :
D300 - 100% coverage, and 0.94x magnification
D7000 - 100% coverage, and 0.94x magnification
D200 - 95% coverage, and 0.94x magnification
D90 - 96% coverage, and 0.94x magnification
D80 - 95% coverage, and 0.94x magnification
(all figures are from the manuals, not the often erroneous DPR posted specs)
Brierfield said:
So, apparently the sensor size doesn't necessarily constrain the size of the viewfinder?
Click to expand...
As mirrors and pentaprisms have to be larger on FF models, sensor size really does matter ;-)

--
Patco
A photograph is more than a bunch of pixels
 
Patco, thanks for clearing this up.

I had read on a website (not DPR's) that the D300 had a FF-sized viewfinder. This is obviously in error.
Patco said:
Brierfield said:
Thanks, Paul.

Yes, I realized that my FE and the FF cameras shared the 35mm frame size. But, I believe that the D300 has a large viewfinder similar to a FF, and it has an APS-C sensor.
Click to expand...
The D300 viewfinder is more or less the same as other Nikon APS-C cameras (excluding the miserable little viewfinders of the entry level models, of course ;-)) :
D300 - 100% coverage, and 0.94x magnification
D7000 - 100% coverage, and 0.94x magnification
D200 - 95% coverage, and 0.94x magnification
D90 - 96% coverage, and 0.94x magnification
D80 - 95% coverage, and 0.94x magnification
(all figures are from the manuals, not the often erroneous DPR posted specs)
Member said:
So, apparently the sensor size doesn't necessarily constrain the size of the viewfinder?
Click to expand...
As mirrors and pentaprisms have to be larger on FF models, sensor size really does matter ;-)

--
Patco
A photograph is more than a bunch of pixels
Click to expand...
 
I've looked into this matter yesterday, and what I did find is that FF bodies don't really have 100% magnification. Here's the source http://www.neocamera.com/article/viewfinder_sizes

But, on the other hand, I remember using my film camera with 52mm lens, and when I looked through the OVF, it was the same as looking with my bare eye. I guess that was real 100% effective magnification, or do I miss something?
--
Alexander A. Repin
Picasa web albums: https://picasaweb.google.com/101627193795089121375
YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/AlexRepin
 
PerrimanSmythe said:
I've looked into this matter yesterday, and what I did find is that FF bodies don't really have 100% magnification. Here's the source http://www.neocamera.com/article/viewfinder_sizes

But, on the other hand, I remember using my film camera with 52mm lens, and when I looked through the OVF, it was the same as looking with my bare eye. I guess that was real 100% effective magnification, or do I miss something?
Click to expand...
You seem to be confusing coverage with magnification. It's extremely rare for either a FF or APS-C camera to have 100% magnification.

A FF camera with 100% coverage and 0.7x magnification will give a larger image in the viewfinder than an APS-C camera with 100% coverage and 0.95x magnification.

--
Patco
A photograph is more than a bunch of pixels
 
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