Yes, but you still need to make sure the camera is focusing on the correct feature or object. It’s often very difficult to tell this on an LCD viewfinder.
Through the lens viewfinder 100%. The LCD’s just are no match.
I wasn’t contradicting that. I was speaking only to the efficacy of modern AF systems.
Speaking of, when it comes to precise manual focusing in which I have the luxury of a tripod and a still subject, the LiveView on the LCD actually is easier (at least to my eyes) than the viewfinder, as you can zoom in and finely tune your focus. So I guess you can add that to the other points above I’ve made for where the LCD is useful.
Panasonic and Olympus already have non-SLR cameras with interchangeable lenses, using their shared Micro Four Thirds standard.
I’m 35. Trying to look into that tiny little window gives me a headache and claustrophobia. I definitely can’t think of any situation where having the camera near my face was a logistical advantage. 90% of the time the camera needs to be somewhere other than my arbitrary eye height to take the optimal photo, and it’s not really convenient to have to find a stool or crouch down awkwardly.
I also really don’t understand why people think it’s somehow more accurate than the lcd screen. Your eyes are far superior to camera sensors, anything that looks fine to the naked eye is not going to look the same to the camera. If things are too bright on the lcd screen surely that means that your picture will definitely be overexposed too. The only advantage I can think of is if there is a mechanical focus.
Also, that little viewfinder window is a frikkin bitch to get clean.
You’ve never heard of a fucking Q-Tip?
Sorry, but this is demonstrably not true. LCDs are too small to really show if something is tightly in focus, and a well built through the lens viewfinder is still far superior. You may be used to using non-DSLRs with significantly smaller viewfinders, but a good DSLR has a good sized viewfinder that is quite a noticeable improvement.
THAT’S where baby Q-Tips come from!
-Joe
That’s fine. It seems you don’t shoot in a way where the viewfinder is advantageous to you. There’s nothing wrong if you prefer to shoot this way. But you seem to be disputing this: “DSLRs are often preferred by professional still photographers because they allow an accurate preview of framing close to the moment of exposure.” That is, indeed, one big reason (among many others) that dSLRs are preferred by professionals (like me, for instance.) I did give situations above where the LCD screen does come in handy. But for 99% of images, it’s a fuck of a lot faster for me, and I presume most professionals, to frame with the camera in your face and shoot. Among other things, the LCD simply does not update quickly enough and gets screwy in any sort of weird lighting situation (like backlight). When you’re shooting action that happens at intervals of hundredths of a second, you can’t afford the split second or more it takes for the LCD to update because you whirled your camera around. You’ve missed the photo.
Moved from The BBQ Pit to Cafe Society.
Gfactor
Pit Moderator
I have the opposite experience. The LCD on my DSLR gets much grubbier with fingerprints and noseprints than the optical viewfinder.
Was a digital point and shoot pocket camera your first experience with photography? I’m curious as I started shooting various film cameras with optical viewfinders when I was 10 or so, so using a viewfinder was so ingrained that by the time I bought my first pocket digicam, I reflexively held it up to my eye.