Customer Discussions > camera discussion forum

Camera with viewfinder

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 65 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 11 Jun 2013 20:20:03 BDT
T.J.Byford says:
Mr. Jackson,

My fellow contributor in the film forum, Dr. Austin, needs accurate framing for his images, and thus the inaccuracy of the optical zoom finders is a concern for him. However, I'm sure D. A won't mind me putting an argument forward for them, for the particular needs of non-photographers, which you claim you are. Whilst it is a disadvantage not to be able to see at the point of taking the picture exactly what will be recorded by the camera, it can be a distinct advantage for you in that as these zoom optical finders show less than they actually capture, you can be absolutely certain that the camera has at least captured your subject as long as the subject was within the frame of the viewfinder.

Ironically, years ago with film single lens reflex cameras, they had the capability of being the most accurate viewfinder of all as they "see" through the taking lens. However, manufacturers still didn't adopt 100% fields of view, partly because of slide mounts which cut off around 1mm of the slide, but the manufacturers went even more than was strictly necessary to allow for this, often showing anything from around 94% to 88%.

Posted on 11 Jun 2013 19:30:26 BDT
Simon C says:
In February 1962 John Glen took a Minolta Hi-matic 35mm camera.
Now it is in the Smithsonian Museum Washington DC.

Posted on 27 Jan 2013 20:24:17 GMT
Zelazowa says:
A fascinating read... all is not what it seems...

In reply to an earlier post on 21 Dec 2012 19:34:15 GMT
jmm says:
re catarcts .

they used ti say they had to 'ripen' Took 12 years fro my hubby , finallt got sight of our boy when he was 12.

GOOD NEWS is that the operation is noe completely different.

My 40 year old daughter ( must be in the genes) has had both of hers dine very quickly. Speak to you Dr. and consultant aswell as your optician.

Bestw sihes.

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Nov 2012 17:20:55 GMT
Having seen Graham's Fuji X10 I was struck by the very wide angle of view of the screen. There was no sunshine but I could see the screen almost from the side. Remarkable compared with a few years ago.

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Nov 2012 05:24:36 GMT
Ms J. Becker says:
Thanks for both those good suggestions. I'll start researching!

Posted on 8 Nov 2012 00:15:26 GMT
Last edited by the author on 8 Nov 2012 10:44:38 GMT
G. E. Hearn says:
Why not get yourself another Canon A1? I have one and I still use it and my other 35mm's loads! In particular my lovely Olympus OM-2n. Which has an absolutely huge and totally uncluttered viewfinder. Way bigger than the 'finder in the Canon A1 and a physically smaller, lighter and better built camera to boot. Get the negs or slides scanned straight to CD when the film's processed and you'll be amazed at the quality:

On the original subject: I have a couple of digitals including the excellent Fujifilm X10 (which may be a contender if you can justify the cost) Certainly it's a cracking machine with a proper viewfinder and it looks, feels and handles like a small Leica-esque 35mm rangefinder. The lens twists manually to zoom in and out, so none of that silly motorised nonsense that traps grit and dirt, and the whole thing just oozes quality and engineering. I love mine lots! But I still love my film cameras more. :-)

Fujifilm X10 Digital Camera - Black (12MP EXR CMOS, 4x Optical Zoom) 2.8 inch LCD Screen

Posted on 6 Nov 2012 18:08:02 GMT
Last edited by the author on 6 Nov 2012 18:09:40 GMT
Ms J. Becker says:
This is a very interesting discussion! I don't agree with Nik Watt that modern screens are fine; I am very fed up with not having a viewfinder. When my last compact camera packed up I intended to buy a video recorder plus a compact with a viewfinder; the latter didn't seem to exist and I was persuaded to buy a Lumix TZ7. It has seen good service and the HD video, very new at the time, is excellent. But half the time when out of doors I can not see anything in the screen except my own reflection, and it's also quite impossible to see the screen with sunglasses on; which is no prob when looking through a viewfinder. I bought a Nikon D80 a while back but it's very heavy and impossibly complex (oh for the Canon A1 I once had), and I am selling it on to my son. The TZ7 now has a piece of grit or something in the lens and needs to be replaced. But by what? I tried the Lumix G series but they have digital viewfinders which are horrible; swimmy like varifocal specs and if you pan the camera, the image moves jerkily. I've looked at the Canon EOS series which may be the answer and have optical viewfinders, but the term electronic viewfinder has cropped up here; is an electronic viewfinder the same as a digital one? And even if one has a camera with a viewfinder they all seem to have screens as well, which are impossible to see in sunlight. Like other people on this thread I'm not young, and in many ways I yearn for the cameras of yore, when depth of field was read off one of the rings and one learnt to judge by experience which stop to use. The rot set in with 35mm, where the viewfinder ceased to be WYSIWYG!

In reply to an earlier post on 25 Oct 2012 14:36:06 BDT
Albeit an electronic viewfinder. Is it any good?

Posted on 24 Oct 2012 14:14:59 BDT
Bob M says:
I suggest that you look at the Nikon v1 - it does at least have a viewfinder.
It comes with a 10-30 zoom and a longer zoom is available or a kit with both is
available. There is a Fuji with a rangefinder style the xpro-1 with a reduced model
just announced. The XE1 but seem not what you require.

Posted on 24 Oct 2012 11:50:39 BDT
Ian Tindale says:
Canon Powershot A1300 Canon PowerShot A1300 Digital Camera - Black (16.0 MP, 5x Optical Zoom) 2.7 inch LCD - I don't have one (I actually have a Fuji X10), but I'm pleased to discover that there's still currently a small camera that has an OVF. It even takes AA batteries (which is excellent if you stock up on a load of Eneloops and a decent charger) as you can always find AA batteries in shops if your rechargeable AA cells conk out or you failed to bring enough charged ones (bring enough charged ones next time).

Posted on 7 Oct 2012 17:01:38 BDT
Last edited by the author on 7 Oct 2012 17:04:18 BDT
G. E. Hearn says:,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=81298c5ac53487c&biw=1366&bih=636

Prices seem to vary, but none of them are all that expensive. Quite a few of the places in that search result are showing available stock.

Posted on 6 Oct 2012 11:02:30 BDT
Nik Watt says:
Considering the progress in technology, wouldn't you be better considering a new camera?

Posted on 5 Oct 2012 21:31:44 BDT
M. M. White says:
I've had a HP Photosmart R717 for years. Itis just right for me, but now it doesn't hold a charge for any length of time. does anybody know where I can get a new battery for it, or the equivalent in a current camera. I especially like it because it has an optical viewfinder ( or at least some kind of viewfinder other than the screen which is useless in the sun)

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Aug 2012 22:53:39 BDT
[Deleted by Amazon on 24 Aug 2012 23:28:20 BDT]

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Aug 2012 22:44:14 BDT
My bros is a leftie. He even had his left arm tied down to try to make him write with his right when he started school! They soon had to give that up. he found fountain pens a bit awkward because he had to keep his hand off the wet ink. The ball pen solved that one though.
My youngest son is left handed with cutlery, right handed with scissors and writing but left handed with some other things. I was told dyslexics often are.
Many engineers are left handed - but not me.

Posted on 24 Aug 2012 22:27:22 BDT
Lilian says:
Hi Dr G,
Maybe there were some people involved with the development of some cameras, who were left-handed and decided to make something to suit their own requirements, and those of millions of others. Seems very odd that some are suitable for left-handers while most or designed specifically for right-handers. Of course most things are designed for right-handers, so left-handers just have to adapt usually.
I sometimes think I was probably left-handed as a child but was 'forced' to become right-handed (quite common all those years ago) I sometimes do things with my left hand without even thinking about it, and I've always preferred to hold a baby on my right arm and feed it with my left hand, whereas most mums do that the other way around :-) Good job we're not all the same isn't it? How boring that would be :-)x

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Aug 2012 21:51:34 BDT
Hi Lilian,
It's interesting to note that some film cameras were left handed. My Exacta had the shutter release on the left and the winder too. This didn't seem odd at the time. Also my Mamiya Press 23 has the shutter release on the left. I wonder why this is? The classic twin lens reflex, on the other hand (geddit?), needs to be held in the right hand to focus with the left and in the left hand to wind on. With practice you can use either hand to release the shutter - and I do both at various times. My Rollei 35S has the shutter release on the right but the winder on the left. Most other cameras I have owned have always been conventionally right handed. I seem to use my left eye to look through viewfinders which means I get nose prints on the screen and hand prints on the right hand lens of my glasses. I'm right handed by the way.

Posted on 24 Aug 2012 18:12:38 BDT
Lilian says:
Thanks Nik. Will do that :-)x

Posted on 24 Aug 2012 17:39:43 BDT
Nik Watt says:
This is maybe against the rules but if you stick after my name (in one word), we could email our distasters?

Posted on 24 Aug 2012 17:35:04 BDT
Lilian says:
Goodness Nik, you do like to live dangerously don't you? I hope you don't do things like that very often!
I had to have my left shoulder replaced about 8 years ago because it simply wouldn't work. The 'ball and socket' bit was in very poor condition apprently, due to the Rheumatoid Arthritis I have had for about 35 years. Tried physio, injections, millions of tablets and nothing worked, so an operation was the only option. I still have a bit of stiffness, but at least I can use my arm reasonably well now. That was when washing my hair using just one hand/arm was a daily challenge but it had to be done or go to the hairdresser every day....not an option I could have afforded :-) I have since had both knees replaced, again due to the arthritis, but I can manage to get about, which is all I need really :-) As we get older everything wears out I suppose :-) In my head I'm about 25 but my body knows the truth :-)x

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Aug 2012 17:15:58 BDT
Nik Watt says:
Nothing 'to do' with photography really, but I awoke one morning - a few years' ago - and I was unable to hold my right hand up for any length of time; and I certainly couldn't lift my Konica Minolta 7D [or the DSLR I currently use]. Which was a 'bit awkward' as I was booked to shoot a food festival..

My wife thought I 'was coming the ham' but I telephone NHS24 and they spoke to Lorna, asking me to smile and stuff as they thought I'd had a stroke..

I borrowed a light DSLR from a friend and everything was fine.

Indeed, the therapy sessions were pretty-much cancelled because of my behaviour: I didn't shy away from things and continued to try to use my hand (I had 'radial-nerve' paulsy' if you wondered). So, by continuing to 'use' my hand as best I could, I made a complete recovery!

Try this tomorrow in your shower: Wash your hair with only one hand - including getting it out of the tube and administrating it to your hair..

Posted on 24 Aug 2012 17:04:27 BDT
Lilian says:
Thanks Nik for your encouragement. Three of my children are left-handers and often find it difficult to find suitable items, especially kitchen things. It's much easier now as there is a plethora of stuff on the internet, but in the 'olden' days it was quite hard :-) My eldest son holds a pen pretty much upside down to write, which looks very odd but it works for him :-) All of them had problems at school because teachers wanted them to use their right hand and they simply couldn't do it. I hadn't thought about someone without a right hand, but that would certainly be a challenge :-)x

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Aug 2012 16:52:38 BDT
Nik Watt says:
I was at a 'training day' [I learned nothing new] with Currys. One set with Samsung had us dressed-up with a suitable background for the costumes - I was more than a fraction amused that the 'technician' was filming the subjects in "portrait" format, as the TV would need to be on its side..

I know folk from when I was at college (four times..) that couldn't 'fix' being left-handed and so they used the cameras 'right-handed' with the unit upsidedown. Or there was a guy who didn't have a right hand: Same idea - with the stump supporting the lens.

There's always 'a way', lass!

Posted on 24 Aug 2012 16:46:10 BDT
Lilian says:
Oh Nik, your post made me laugh out loud....thank you :-) I suddenly had a vision of myself trying to turn the tv 'on its head' so to speak :-) I hadn't even thought about turning the camera upside down...maybe I'll give that a try next time I'm out and about :-) Thanks again for the laugh :-)x
‹ Previous 1 2 3 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in

Recent discussions in the camera discussion forum (32 discussions)

More Customer Discussions

Most active community forums
Most active product forums

Amazon forums

This discussion

Discussion in:  camera discussion forum
Participants:  14
Total posts:  65
Initial post:  13 Apr 2012
Latest post:  11 Jun 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 6 customers

Search Customer Discussions