Reading mode: Light Dark

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

Go to last post
Slightly more EVF than LCD;perhaps 60/40%

For fast or casual work I prefer the LCD; just raise the camera between me and what happens, and click. Its a lot like the olden days 'blind' shooting, but now you still get an idea what's in frame. It helps to see what is going on outside the frame to get the right moment

(for those not old enough; 'blind shooting was the fast way with most camera's before auto everything; set exposure to the general light conditions and set focal distance to hyperfocal distance in advance, make sure you know the angle of your lens, aim in the general direction and click away).

For serious work with more attention to precise composition I use the EVF for hand held, and the LCD mostly when on tripod.
 
gugarci said:
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.
Click to expand...
There's no such thing as too low. If you're comfortable shooting and are getting shake free results then carry on as you are.

Even though I do use my EVF a fair amount I'd much rather give up the EVF on my m43 camera than the swivel screen. I don't see anything wrong with that. I have good eyesight and steady arms though so seemingly have less need for a VF than a lot of people who have posted.
 
Last edited:
Dheorl said:
gugarci said:
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.
Click to expand...
There's no such thing as too low. If you're comfortable shooting and are getting shake free results then carry on as you are.

Even though I do use my EVF a fair amount I'd much rather give up the EVF on my m43 camera than the swivel screen. I don't see anything wrong with that. I have good eyesight and steady arms though so seemingly have less need for a VF than a lot of people who have posted.
Click to expand...
No I meant too low in relation to most people that have responded to my thread. I'm not changing my shooting habit unless my eye sight changes. But as of right now even with my glasses I can see my LCD well enough to even use manual focusing.
 
I would never buy a camera again without an EVF. The only time I use the rear screen for shooting is for time exposures on a tripod, shooting video on a tripod and for copying slides.

****
 
Digital **** said:
I would never buy a camera again without an EVF. The only time I use the rear screen for shooting is for time exposures on a tripod, shooting video on a tripod and for copying slides.

****
Click to expand...
Neither will I. But I can't say that with 100% certainty because who knows what new technology will bring in the future for better & brighter OLED/LCD's. And considering how many people just use phones & tablets for images now the EVF/Viewfinder might one day disappear completely. But as of right now I will not buy a camera either unless it has a built in EVF.
 
[No message]
 
Last edited:
Gato Amarillo said:
Sean Nelson said:
Dheorl said:
What I'd really love to compose with tbh is something akin to large format ground glass.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
...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.
Click to expand...
My first cameras were medium format with waist level finders (Rollei TLRs and a Bronica). I agree that it's easy enough to get used to them, but I'd never suggest that they're as useful or enjoyable to use as a modern EVF or decently sized LCD panel.

A high resolution EVF with good optics is all you really need if you're looking for a big image to view. The problem with large LCD panels is that they make the whole camera very awkward to use. That's not a problem for some styles of photography, but it is for others.

There's still plenty of room for improvement in EVF resolutions and apparent size, but compared to older viewfinder technologies I think that's the direction that holds the most promise.
 
gugarci said:
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.
Click to expand...
Using the EVF anchors the camera to your face and helps make for a much more stable shooting platform which makes a huge difference in many situations. Shooting with a slow shutter speed or with a long lens, is significantly hampered when shooting handheld with the LCD.

No matter how good LCD's get, it doesn't matter. Try shooting 300mm on a m4/3 at 1/125th while holding it at arms length and see how often you get a good sharp shot, even with IS enabled. If cameras lost their viewfinders, I would stop shooting.
 
Well,

It is quite obvious that nearly 100% of users preferr using a EVF. This is a quite informative thread and really worthwhile, thanks so much.
 
Last edited:
Even though high-ISO performance is much better than ever, all digital cameras produce their best work at base ISO. In order to stay at it (or as close as possible), I hold just as long as shutters as physically possible. It is physically possible to hold longer shutters when you press the viewfinder to your face and use both hands to hold/steady than it is when you hold the camera in front of you with your arms outstretched so you can use the screen.

Maybe some day I'll stop caring about the quality of my work. I'll be dead on that day. Until then, the screen only gets used when I have to hold the camera over the heads of a flock of iPhone users blocking the shot. If the light is strong enough to where I don't need to work to stay at base ISO, it's also likely strong enough that I can't see the screen anyway.
 
I use EVFs on all my P&S and mirrorless cameras nearly all the time, with the only exception being the occasional tripod night shooting long exposure work, during which I'll often use the LCD flipped up.

On my DSLR, it's of course 0% of the time for EVF, because it has an OVF - however for the OVF the percentages are the same - about 97-98% of the time, with the LCD only used for tripod night long exposures.
 
I find EVF more practical and easier to use so I really don´t need the back screen much. Pekka
 
Almost always. The rear lcd is used only for shooting up very high or certain ground level shots, and for settings.
 
nt
 
I tend to forget the EVF on my G1 exists. As an eyeglass wearer with bad astigmatism, heavy correction for nearsightedness, and now a progressive bifocal, there's no way I can see through a viewfinder and keep my glasses on. I prefer to keep my glasses on so I don't step off a cliff.

I can hold the LCD close to my face and glance over the top of my glasses, since my uncorrected near vision still works. In bright sun, the LCD is shaded by the brim of my anti-sunburn hat. Perhaps the good Lord intended me to be a mole and not a human.

I share these sorry autobiographical details simply to state the obvious: we all have different bodies (and in particular different eyesight) and different goals when shooting pictures. So enjoy using an EVF whenever it works for you.
 
Last edited:
95% of the time. Mostly because I need reading glasses and my arms aren't long enough. I also prefer to frame my shots without others staring over my shoulder at what I'm doing. I especially like the EVF for reviewing shots, where getting pinpoint focus is critical.

Having said that, I use it a lot less with the RX1. It's a combination of having a pretty good screen in bright light and a so-so (though crazy pricey) EVF.
 
Last edited:
Sean Nelson said:
Gato Amarillo said:
Sean Nelson said:
Dheorl said:
What I'd really love to compose with tbh is something akin to large format ground glass.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
...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.
Click to expand...
My first cameras were medium format with waist level finders (Rollei TLRs and a Bronica). I agree that it's easy enough to get used to them, but I'd never suggest that they're as useful or enjoyable to use as a modern EVF or decently sized LCD panel.
Click to expand...
In my initial comment I was merely meaning it would be nice to have a screen the size of an 8x10 ground glass. I'd love a form factor that would be a slimmer version of the black magic studio camera. To me being able to see something at a reasonable display size physically in front of me will always be a million times better than a tiny viewfinder.

I guess different strokes for different folks. 'Tis what keeps the world interesting.
Sean Nelson said:
A high resolution EVF with good optics is all you really need if you're looking for a big image to view. The problem with large LCD panels is that they make the whole camera very awkward to use. That's not a problem for some styles of photography, but it is for others.
Click to expand...
Tbh I find a viewfinder a problem for just as many styles of photography as I think I'd find a big screen a problem for. Might just be because of my love of proper camera support and low angles though.
Sean Nelson said:
There's still plenty of room for improvement in EVF resolutions and apparent size, but compared to older viewfinder technologies I think that's the direction that holds the most promise.
Click to expand...
 
[No message]
 
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