Customer Discussions > photography discussion forum

Want a new digital camera with viewfinder, advice please


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 251-275 of 318 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 19 May 2012 21:30:52 BDT
[Deleted by the author on 19 May 2012 21:40:28 BDT]

Posted on 19 May 2012 21:53:10 BDT
G. E. Hearn says:
Mr Surita! Good to hear from you again. I believe you made some interesting posts in some previous film-related threads didn't you? I trust you're well?

Posted on 22 May 2012 21:13:58 BDT
Dr G
It is a poor show by Nikon and Canon that they fail to put decent viewfinders on their cameras. When they strive to improve cameras one must wonder why they make such awful viewfinders. Do the people, who design cameras not realise that holding a camera out in front, because there is no viewfinder, is not the proper way to hold a camera. My wife looks at the screen first to see what she is taking, that assumes that she can see the screen. She then uses the viewfinder on her Canon S70 so that she can hold the camera correctly.
James

Posted on 5 Jun 2012 02:29:11 BDT
Rex Humphrey says:
Hi, I see this argument has been going for ages. I have just had to stop using my Canon S2IS as the background in the viewfinder stayed white even when the camera was switched off, and drained the batteries immediately, (even the excellent enoloop which I saw mentioned) Sadly there was no compact with a viewfinder, so for the first time I've bought a camera without one. It's the Sony hxc9v. This has an adjustable brightness mode for the screen, which is adequate, but not more. However like a lot of modern cameras it has an inbuilt stabilizing system. This works extremely well and compensates for not being able to hold the camera at eye level, especially using the awesome 16x zoom lens. It has to said that I have a leaflet here put in my door some years ago, from a firm called cameras direct, and all the compacts had a viewfinder. It's about time that the screens were made much brighter.

Posted on 5 Jun 2012 11:36:38 BDT
Last edited by the author on 5 Jun 2012 12:52:55 BDT
X says:
Rex: The best source of compacts with viewfinders is what I suppose should be called the high end of the second-hand market. Currently there are better screens available called OLED, Organic Light Emitting Diode, but I've not seen them on many compacts, certainly not on more affordable models. I've tried the technology on a Samsung and an Olympus, both being Advanced Compacts, and it's used extensively for televisions. Something tells me that OLED screens take a lot out of the battery. A classic LED screen with a brightness adjustment would definitely chew up the battery.

The two cameras to which I referred above had a significant difference: The Samsung screen could be adjusted into every possible position, so it could face away from the sun shining over the photographer's shoulder straight onto the subject. That's a great solution, but it requires an "apprenticeship". The Olympus screen is fixed. However I could not favour the Samsung on one feature; the Olympus is a cracking camera.

Try to avoid having the sun shining directly over your shoulder. For shots of people that also makes it less likely that they will have scrunched-up faces. However, adult people can be moved to where you need them to be; everything else would be problematic, so you have to find your way of getting a good, original shot.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Jun 2012 02:42:09 BDT
Rex Humphrey says:
X I suspect you are right about screens using up batteries. My afore-mentioned Canon had an adjustable screen as well as a viewfinder, and it certainly drained the batteries quicker. My camcorder also only has an adjustable screen, but then it comes with a decent sized battery so lasts much longer. I suppose if you want 'small' with big magnification there has to be a trade-off, though on full mag, the image dances about somewhat! Next time we get some sunny weather I shall try your tips, thanks.

Posted on 12 Jun 2012 14:16:27 BDT
Last edited by the author on 12 Jun 2012 14:18:03 BDT
T.J.Byford says:
Hi, everyone.

As this forum goes back to 2009, I've not read every subsequent posting.

I find the main advantage of any v/f, be it an EVF or optical, is it brings stability when holding the camera. But as has already been mentioned, built-in optical finders on compacts are very inaccurate leading to parallax errors and much less than full field of view. Some of the latest high-end compacts from Sony, Olympus and Panasonic have the option to attach a supplementary EVF, but what if your camera doesn't provide this option?

I wonder why I haven't spotted any reference to using an accessory folding hood on the main screen on any digital compact that doesn't come with a viewfinder? I use a Delkin, because it comes with a built in polycarbonate screen protector, on my Panasonic LX3 and this really does help viewing in sunny weather. And then what can one do to stabilise the camera at arms length, which everyone accepts is the least conducive to holding it steady?

Well, I simply use the same technique I used with my Yashicamat and Rolleiflex film cameras, but instead of pulling down, I pull out. I shorten the neck strap to the appropriate length and simply pull this taught as I hold the camera out. It is quite amazing at just how much stability this affords.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Jun 2012 15:32:31 BDT
As long as your compact has fixings for a neck strap.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Jun 2012 15:35:17 BDT
T.J.Byford says:
Ooops, yes, good point.

Posted on 7 Aug 2012 23:18:14 BDT
I suffer from macular degeneration and cataract
and wear a hat all the time which cuts down some of the glare - I see much better with the hat, but if I am looking at something with light behind it, I cannot see much at all, so a LED screen is almost invisible!
Phasing out optical viewfinders is DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE VISUALLY IMPAIRED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ann with the hat

In reply to an earlier post on 7 Aug 2012 23:24:45 BDT
I agree. It also discriminates against those of us who want to hold the camera in the most stable position - against the face.

In reply to an earlier post on 7 Aug 2012 23:35:52 BDT
Last edited by the author on 7 Aug 2012 23:37:37 BDT
It seems some models are supposed to be wobble proof, but I doubt if any system would cope with my advanced blurring habits!

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Aug 2012 10:15:08 BDT
T.J.Byford says:
Hello, Ann,

It is beginning to look like you'd be the perfect person to have in a camera company's R&D Department. If they could take your experiences and turn out a camera you could use without difficulty, they'd be on to a winner, and so would you! :-D

I appreciate this is a digital camera forum, and I am no doubt going off piste here, but have you thought of going back to film? If you got hold of an autofocusing 35mm slr this will have a large viewfinder that accurately shows the field of view and with an autofocusing lens you wouldn't have to worry about focusing. And you could fit a prescription lens to the viewfinder eyepiece if necessary.

You would have to hold this up to your eye thus affording the proper way to hand-hold a camera and if you fit an eye cup, you'd cut out most, if not all of the extraneous light. The downside, is of course, I am talking about a film camera which will be relatively bulky and heavy if all you want is a small digital compact. But if you found this type of camera you could use better, why not?

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Aug 2012 11:52:46 BDT
Don't want film or bulky camera thanks. Current camera does most things I want, but view finder does not give same view as screen, so I get things missed off . Was told I could cure this by cropping etc, but I like composing pictures.... I want one with anti shake and point and shoot technology with simple controls.

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Aug 2012 12:11:43 BDT
Hi Ann
The bad news is you are out of luck. If you find a camera with an accurate viewfinder at affordable cost please share it here.

Posted on 9 Aug 2012 09:19:43 BDT
Last edited by the author on 9 Aug 2012 09:20:23 BDT
G. E. Hearn says:
The viewfinder will generally show less that the complete picture, so you should find you have extra space around the borders of your pics rather than getting bits cut off?
I know of no optical-viewfinder equipped compacts with anything even approaching 100% coverage. You're lucky to get into the high 80's from experience.

The Fujifilm X10 will do what you need (Small, optical finder, anti-shake, simple big controls and great image quality) but you might find the 350 price a bit steep.

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Aug 2012 09:29:53 BDT
Price too much!
Will check out chop factor.

Posted on 9 Aug 2012 09:33:42 BDT
G. E. Hearn says:
I thought it might be. I have one, and I'm quite impressed with it, but it's very much a case of getting what you pay for.
I'd still say that Canon's IXUS95IS would do what you need - it you can find one (They're old now, but good):

Canon Digital IXUS 95 IS Digital Camera - Silver (10 MP, 3.0x Optical Zoom) 2.5 inch LCD

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Aug 2012 10:14:15 BDT
Have just been out and taken shots noting vertical and horizontal lines there is about a third extra on photo, so you are right, but still accounts for wonky composition!
Sony w630 16.1, priced 109 plus in some lists includes viewfinder, but I have just spoken to Sony who say not. and quote DSC-HX200V @ 400 pounds....

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Aug 2012 10:39:48 BDT
Looks good, but I think I have to actually get hands on in shop before I decide - none near where I live!

Posted on 9 Aug 2012 10:49:56 BDT
G. E. Hearn says:
You won't find the IXUS95IS in any shops as it's been replaced at least twice by now. By newer cameras with no optical viewfinders, annonyingly enough.

The only way it may work for you is to buy one online from somewhere that allows no-quibble returns if unsatisfied. Dr G on here I believe also has an IXUS95IS. Hopefully he might see this and give us his views.

Good luck with whatever you decide. :-)

Posted on 9 Aug 2012 10:53:59 BDT
G. E. Hearn says:
You won't find the IXUS95IS in any shops as it's been replaced at least twice by now. By newer cameras with no optical viewfinders, annonyingly enough.

The only way it may work for you is to buy one online from somewhere that allows no-quibble returns if unsatisfied. Dr G on here I believe also has an IXUS95IS. Hopefully he might see this and give us his views.

Good luck with whatever you decide. :-)

Posted on 9 Aug 2012 12:24:05 BDT
Last edited by the author on 9 Aug 2012 12:27:09 BDT
Hi Graham and Ann.
I bought 2 Ixus 95 cameras for my lads and an A1100si for me because it's a touch bigger. If you get a canera which takes AA batteries for goodness sake buy Eneloop rechargables; thanks for that tip Graham.
We all find our cameras fine but the Ixus has a few more styles like 'vivid'
I bought these from canon_uk on Ebay. They will take returns. All the cameras are "refurbished" but all 3 I bought looks brand new and cost about 65.
Other cameras with viewfinders are the Ixus 100 and the A1200IS. have a look at this for a bargain: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Canon-Powershot-A1200-Digital-Camera-Black-refurbished-/280936753417?pt=UK_CamerasPhoto_DigitalCameras_DigitalCameras_JN&hash=item416922a909
That camera cost 200 about 2 or 3 years ago!
They only charge 3 postage too and they are extremely quick. I got a canon printer next day. Some of the cheaper canon printers go for next to nothing.

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Aug 2012 16:26:08 BDT
I have got obsessed with this search, and following your excellent links. Good news, I have found a model you don't mention, that I can ac tually go and TRY instore. This is Canon Power Shot A1300 at 89!!!!!! @WEX

In reply to an earlier post on 9 Aug 2012 19:09:38 BDT
T.J.Byford says:
Ann, make sure you try out the camera thoroughly. Take some test images and view them.

The zoom lens goes out to the equivalent of 140mm, not easy to handhold, especially as you have indicated shake issues. The camera doesn't have proper image stabilisation and at the tele end the aperture is very low at f6.9 which will force the camera to use slower shutter speeds, which will all contribute to blurry images, if you are not very careful. You will still get a woefully inadequate viewfinder. But it is inexpensive, and this will certainly show. But if it suits you, why not?
[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 photography discussion forum (764 discussions)

 

This discussion

Participants:  76
Total posts:  318
Initial post:  5 Nov 2009
Latest post:  13 Nov 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 16 customers

Search Customer Discussions