Canon G16 Viewfinder

Started Sep 25, 2013 | Questions thread
edu T Senior Member • Posts: 1,174
Canon G16 viewfinder, why not 100% coverage?

meland wrote:

cmc1 wrote:

Why can't they do 100%? it would make the camera much more desirable.

It might make it more desirable in theory but if the price also increased significantly no one would buy it.

To achieve 100% coverage you would need a set of viewfinder optics perfectly calibrated to the focal lengths of the taking lens and able to zoom in tandem with no loss of focal length synchronisation at any point in the zoom range at any focus distance. Since modern lenses are rarely symmetrical in their optical design these days there is often a change in focal length as they are focussed closer than infinity, so that would have to be taken into account as well. In addition the viewfinder would have to be able to compensate for parallax at closer distances since the taking lens and the viewfinder are not pointing at the same part of the subject.

So to really achieve 100% coverage probably the only practical way of doing this would be to have a G16 with two matched taking lenses - one to take the photo and one to act as the viewfinder (which essentially was what TLRs used to do). However I suspect you can now see the downsides of that approach not only in terms of cost but also in size.


Not to mention that the user would get royally pi├žed off when, due to parallax, something seen next the borders of the VF is lost on the pic (not an issue with 85%), nor that the lens barrel would become really conspicuous at WA, nor that for non-reflex compact cameras there exists a more elegant eye-level solution (nikon P7800, panny LF1) called, you know...

 edu T's gear list:edu T's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F550 EXR
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow