The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

The Merits and Workflow of Various Viewfinder Tools

dchew

Well-known member
In the XF/GFX thread, Erik commented on some different aspects of live view vs viewfinder:
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-and-digital-backs/63038-phase-one-x1d-gfx.html#post746974

Hopefully Erik doesn’t mind that I quote a part of that:
“An interesting observation is that I by and large prefer an EVF over a monitor screen. The EVF works best with an eyecup. But, here is an interesting thing, after composing an image trough the EVF and looking at the monitor I often feel I can improve the composition. I guess that the EVF shows the subject in isolation while the monitor shows it in a different way.

The way I work, mostly, is that I use my hands as a framing tool. So, when I get to a place I walk around and look for a good point of view. Once I find a PoV, I start looking for a good composition. Once composition is found I start to consider which lens to use.

“The reason I think about this is in part a series with Charles Cramer on LuLa. Charlie always carries some viewing frames cut from cardboard. Perhaps I should carry something like that, too.”
I’m guessing by now most of us have watched the above-referenced Charlie Cramer piece on Lula. I’ve been carrying a similar card for years, but frankly haven’t used it much lately and it got me wondering why? And more importantly, What accessory tools do all of you use, if any?

First, a few of my viewfinder quirks (I’ve got many other quirks, but they are not related to viewfinders, and therefore not relevant to the discussion):
  • For some reason, I abhor hand-holding cameras without viewfinders. It is one reason I hate using my iPhone. I doubt I will ever buy a dedicated camera without a viewfinder for handheld use.
  • Once the camera is mounted on a tripod, I love using the LCD screen and hate using a viewfinder. I have no idea why that is. Purely comfort? Better intimacy with the image I am trying to make? When Live view came out on the Canon 5D, it was probably the single feature that benefited my photography more than any other.
  • For handholding, I like rangefinders better than SLR’s / EVF’s, but again I am not sure why that is. Every rangefinder I’ve used had the view on the port side of the camera. Gets my big nose out of the way and makes it easy to see what is going on with both eyes. Is it just comfort, or again is my preference related to seeing what is going on around the image? Certainly others tout that as a benefit, but I don’t really know. I darn well better get the Leica CL to find out for sure if it is the aspects associated with a rangefinder or just its position on the camera. :)

This got me thinking: I prefer seeing what is going on around the image because it makes me feel like I am in the environment with my camera, as opposed to viewing the environment through my camera. My distaste for cameras without viewfinders while handheld cannot be simply habit; I used a DSLR for most of my formative semi-serious photography years. Still, I find the rangefinder is the in-between Goldilocks when handholding (for me).

Now back to the viewing card Charlie uses. I have a small one, even has the lanyard for wearing around my neck. But I haven’t used it much because I’ve been using the Alpa Viewfinder App on my iPhone. Wait, what?? I hate using the iPhone without a viewfinder but use the screen as a viewfinder for my technical camera?? Well, it has my lens views programmed in (not the 35 or 40mm – too wide) and various stitch formats so I can see what an 18mm horizontal or vertical stitch would look like. Very convenient with no guessing.

I agree with Erik in the benefits to walking around without a lens mounted. I’m lazy and too easily influenced. I wander around, find something of some interest then either move forward-backward, left-right, or up-down until the perspective feels right. At that point, I need tools to help my brain. Maybe cup my hands over one eye is enough, or pull out the Viewfinder App. Regardless it is a very iterative process, moving around a few feet, walking back and forth, standing on a log or crouching down, both with and without the tools. Zero in on a spot with the right perspective. Only then does the camera come out. Sometimes after being out for a while I do think/see in a specific focal length, and start walking around with a lens mounted. Probably not good for my images or my equipment. That lazy part is hard to shake…

Easy for me to conclude I use these tools because they are efficient and convenient. But if that was my only reason I certainly wouldn’t be using a technical camera. I think we all settle on a specific mix of tools that strike the right balance between the environment we are in experiencing, and the images we are attempting to make (with a big dollop of habit thrown on top). This balance may seem nonsensical to everyone around us, yet feel natural none the less. I think that is what Erik means by, “I guess that the EVF shows the subject in isolation while the monitor shows it in a different way.”

Couldn’t agree more, Erik!

Dave
 
Last edited:

Shashin

Well-known member
I do not like EVFs. Not only are they not very satisfying to use, they really isolate me from the environment. I actually like the LCD monitor, not only because the image is much nicer, but also it does not isolate me from the environment--it is simple to look between that and the actual scene. And oddly, I do use the LCD more than the viewfinder when the mounted in a tripod. Perhaps it is more comfortable...

I like optical finders, with a preference toward rangefinder/viewfinder systems. Although, when they get too small, they do lose some of their magic--one reason I preferred the Pentax 645D over the Nikon D800. The Mamiya 6 and Horseman SW612 viewfinders are great. I like the OVF because I can see the scene without the camera modifying it. It is also far more subtle than an EVF and far closer to the subtlety of the final image. It also reinforces what I am seeing when taking the image, which I find important when it comes to post.

As far as lens choice, I keep a lens on the camera. I have done 99% of my work with a normal lens. I think it is because the perspective is natural. So the magic of the image comes from the content, not the focal length. I had a teacher that asked one day if a particular image was good because of the effect I was using (I had hand colored a b&w negative and printed it) or because of the inherent qualities of the image, in other words, if it was not for the technique, would the image still be captivating? I also notice that most the photography I enjoyed came from medium- and larger-format photographers. Those formats tend not to have extreme focal lengths, like 35mm. I felt the strongest images where from very modest focal lengths. (I am starting to think that the medium-format "look" is more a product of focal length than DoF.)

I also notice that I learn how a particular camera sees. I tend to hang onto my cameras. Part of that is learning the focal length, the other is learning the format. So when I pick up a camera, what I am seeing through the viewfinder is what I was seeing before. Seeing a place and photographing it becomes a seamless transition. And maybe that come for my preference to documentary photography where it is attempting to share an experience of something rather than constructing an experience.

So, this comes back to that old conversation of whether the camera is simply a value-free tool. It is not. My three most important criteria is format and viewfinder/camera type. Everything else can be worked around. While I can pick up any camera and use it, it does take me a while to figure it out to where I am really comfortable with it. And if I don't gel with a camera, I don't really use it. I guess this is why I hang onto cameras. Any limitation to my photography will be me (not noise, DR, resolution, or lens quality).
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
I'm of two minds; if I'm shooting handheld I use the EVF of the GFX and have never felt it lacking. On the other hand, on tripod I always (at least 99%) us the LCD. There are some instances where shooting handheld I need to use the LCD if shooting something awkward or over my head and like that the LCD articulates.

I was pleased when Fuji announced the tilt EVF thinking it would be similar to the waist level on my XF however after I found it was an additional piece that sandwiches in-between the body and EVF and that I would still need to have my eyes close to the EVF I decided against it. (it reminds me of the older Mamiya stovepipe viewfinder.) So far I have never had an instance where tilting the LCD to suite the conditions failed me.

I'm off to Alaska in a couple weeks where I'll be shooting north of Fairbanks. I realize I'll be on tripod almost 100% and have begun experimenting using the GFX without the EVF attached thus giving me a smaller footprint making it easier to use the wrap I'll be using to protect it from the cold.

I travel with the lens detached as it makes it easier and smaller. I choose the lens I want on site which is different from when I traveled with the XF. Traveling with the XF I'd switch out the prism for the waist level and keep the widest lens attached.

Merry Christmas to all

Don
 

JohnL

New member
Dave,

I forgot to mention that I use same iterative process as you to assess and visualize an image from a scene, and I use whatever tools needed to "help my brain", too! :grin:

Regards, John

Hmm, looks like this post arrived before the previous post the above comment refers to. Hope my original reply gets posted soon! Sorry for any confusion.
 
Last edited:

stevenfr

Active member
I use viewfinders from my Horseman 617 camera. I have three viewfinders for each of the lenses I used with the Horseman. I use the 90, 110 and 180 viewfinders to find the location I want to shoot my panoramics. It helps me decide where to stand for my co position how much to include in my stitched panoramic images.

You can see me using the 180mm viewfinder in this Phase One blog post. There is a video in the blog post.

https://stories.phaseone.com/steven-friedman-shoots-intriguing-landscapes/
 

dchew

Well-known member
I use viewfinders from my Horseman 617 camera. I have three viewfinders for each of the lenses I used with the Horseman. I use the 90, 110 and 180 viewfinders to find the location I want to shoot my panoramics. It helps me decide where to stand for my co position how much to include in my stitched panoramic images.

You can see me using the 180mm viewfinder in this Phase One blog post. There is a video in the blog post.

https://stories.phaseone.com/steven-friedman-shoots-intriguing-landscapes/
That's interesting Steven. I saw that great video; congratulations and very nice! If my math is correct, the 90 viewfinder would directly relate to my sk60mm shifted 18mm. that is if I could visually (or mechanically) crop the ends off to a 4x9 ratio instead of the native 6x17. The rodi 90 and sk150 don't map as nicely, but the 250 viewfinder might be close enough. That would be fun to try, and there are probably some benefits to looking through a dedicated viewfinder. The Alpa app (which I'm pretty sure is the same thing as the Artist's Viewfinder) can be customized to exactly the view I need, but it has the disadvantages of an LCD screen and battery power. The lack of wide angle lens on the phone isn't a big impediment for me since I don't use wides all that much, and hardly ever do wide angle panos.

Cool stuff.

Dave
 

dchew

Well-known member
Dave,

I forgot to mention that I use same iterative process as you to assess and visualize an image from a scene, and I use whatever tools needed to "help my brain", too! :grin:

Regards, John

Hmm, looks like this post arrived before the previous post the above comment refers to. Hope my original reply gets posted soon! Sorry for any confusion.
Hey John,
I think Dante ate your first post. Your post must have not recommended any new tools to buy like Steven did. Dante punishes for that, you know!

Dave
 

JohnL

New member
Hey John,
I think Dante ate your first post. Your post must have not recommended any new tools to buy like Steven did. Dante punishes for that, you know!

Dave
But I did in my earlier post that Dante ate! I have tried contacting "Dante" for an explanation of what his problem is. :mad:

-John
 

stevenfr

Active member
I mostly use the 180 viewfinder. It hard to be as wide as the 110 or the 90 in a forest. For me It really makes life easies to just use the viewfinder. I have tried the photo app, it just adds another layer of tech when I just need something simple. I prefer the 1 to 3 format for panos, the format fits perfectly for installs above couches, beds hallways etc.

Thank you for the feedback on the video. It was very kind of Phase to do it.


That's interesting Steven. I saw that great video; congratulations and very nice! If my math is correct, the 90 viewfinder would directly relate to my sk60mm shifted 18mm. that is if I could visually (or mechanically) crop the ends off to a 4x9 ratio instead of the native 6x17. The rodi 90 and sk150 don't map as nicely, but the 250 viewfinder might be close enough. That would be fun to try, and there are probably some benefits to looking through a dedicated viewfinder. The Alpa app (which I'm pretty sure is the same thing as the Artist's Viewfinder) can be customized to exactly the view I need, but it has the disadvantages of an LCD screen and battery power. The lack of wide angle lens on the phone isn't a big impediment for me since I don't use wides all that much, and hardly ever do wide angle panos.

Cool stuff.

Dave
 

JohnL

New member
OK, 4th try

Hi Dave,

Regarding the viewfinder card, I've made several, the last one with a particular length of string that, when wrapped into several "calibrated" notches in the card, gave me FOV of various focal lengths when the end of the string was held at the end of my nose. Of course, when others were around, I often got quite the look. :wtf: But when I pulled out a relatively big honking view camera from the bag, my slight embarrassment was somewhat assuaged. :bugeyes:

Just before the card wore out, I found and occassionally used an old Exacta zoom optical viewfinder that fit on old Exacta 35mm cameras, simulating the FOV of various lenses. It only went from about 35mm to about 135mm focal lengths, hence the present mini director's viewfinder, an Alan Gordon brand. I marked its settings with equivalent FF and MF focal lengths and serves me rather well, with equivalent 35mm focal lengths from 28mm to 320mm.

Available from Amazon, B&H, etc., for about $180. Other less expensive brands are available there as well, some seeming to be exact copies of the AG.

Best Regards, John
 

Attachments

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I think that I’ve probably tried most if not all of the techniques and tools covered here. The separate Linhof LF adjustable VF being the first, then the mat which was always too fragile & bulky, then the ViewCatcher & the clear Compose-It-Grid (both of which any art supply store carries) and even bought an Alan Gordon full sized director’s finder which I think that I used exactly twice (mine is the Vb with the multiple focal length/format and isn’t mini anything!). Then of course the full Alpa optical finder with custom masks to match my 23/32/90 lenses which every time I added or changed lenses would take 6-8 weeks for Alpa to cut me a new mask. Ultimately though I have ended up sticking with the Dire / Alpa Viewfinder app and/or dead reckoning when shooting wide on a technical camera. I’ve used the app for a number of years and Laszlo Pusztai has always been responsive as a developer.

With the earlier iPhones up to v6 I used the Schneider iProLens case and super wide lenses to enable framing and with the iPhone 7+ and 8+ swapped to the Olloclip system. These allow me to frame even as wide as 21/22mm (or custom stitch formats) with IQ3100 and the Olloclip Ultra-wide lens (0.5x). I have a couple of Olloclip base clips which allow me to clip the lenses to one attached to the shoulder strap of my camera bag via a caribiner and another so that I can stow the lenses inside the bag. It it all looks a little dorky but works well and the reference pics/location info are a good shooting record later.

For example, yes everything including the kitchen sink:

AE13C452-8A40-476D-8787-50536FDC5B45.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Shashin

Well-known member
One new source for optical finders for me is Sigma, with their finders for their DP cameras. Obviously, there is a limit to focal lengths, but the finders are bigger than the Voightlander finders and cheaper than the Zeiss and Leica finders. The one I bought seems to be well made. I got the DP0 finder for my X Pro2 and the XF 14mm. Obviously, a 3:2 aspect ratio.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi Dave,

Thanks for starting this interesting thread!

With the viewfinder, I see the subject in isolation. I can see thing I can crop out, but I don't see things I can crop in.

Also, the viewfinder shows the subject out of context. I often feel that the composition is as good as it gets in the viewfinder. Looking at the back I often feel that the subjects needs a little bit more "air" mostly on the top side.

The Hasselblad V is used to shoot is 56x56 mm format, so I used it with a pretty much transparent 37x49 mm viewfinder mask. That was useful, because id showed four different compositions at the same time, that is 37x49, 49x37, 56x56 and 37x37.

Often I found that the 37x49 crop was too tight. The image below is an example of that:

The original composition stopped at the tree tops on the right side. But, the uncropped viewfinder showed a lot of sky and that made me consider that the cloudscape should be included in the image.

In this case I just made another exposure with the camera tilted upwards.

The way I normally go about landscape shooting is that I put the camera down and walk around thinking compositions. So, I may have some 3-4 different images on mind. I normally just form a rectangle with my hands and thumbs crossed for viewing, but I will try a viewing frame made from cardboard.

Best regards
Erik

I agree with Erik in the benefits to walking around without a lens mounted. I’m lazy and too easily influenced. I wander around, find something of some interest then either move forward-backward, left-right, or up-down until the perspective feels right. At that point, I need tools to help my brain. Maybe cup my hands over one eye is enough, or pull out the Viewfinder App. Regardless it is a very iterative process, moving around a few feet, walking back and forth, standing on a log or crouching down, both with and without the tools. Zero in on a spot with the right perspective. Only then does the camera come out. Sometimes after being out for a while I do think/see in a specific focal length, and start walking around with a lens mounted. Probably not good for my images or my equipment. That lazy part is hard to shake…

Easy for me to conclude I use these tools because they are efficient and convenient. But if that was my only reason I certainly wouldn’t be using a technical camera. I think we all settle on a specific mix of tools that strike the right balance between the environment we are in experiencing, and the images we are attempting to make (with a big dollop of habit thrown on top). This balance may seem nonsensical to everyone around us, yet feel natural none the less. I think that is what Erik means by, “I guess that the EVF shows the subject in isolation while the monitor shows it in a different way.”

Couldn’t agree more, Erik!

Dave
 

Geoff

Well-known member
Great thread. Good to think about this.

I must confess to a bit of confusion as previous ideals seem to be going through big rethink. I used to think that ground glass was key to my process to visualize the image and make the process more considered. Loved using it in LF cameras, stitching backs, and older medium format cameras with big focusing screens. And if using movements, needed them in two directions. Don't enjoy electronic viewfinders at all (if I wanted to watch TV, I'd be doing that), but then again LCD back screens and live view seemed fine, and good substitutes for ground glass.

So then there's reality:

- never seem to get the right shot using cameras with LCD back screens. Do much better with rangefinders and optical viewfinders.
- sometimes shoot with a stitching back and GG, but mostly using a tech camera, no previewing tools, movements only in one direction (works well for 95% of the shots, for the other few, just tilt and correct in post). No live view is fine - Just visualize the image and shoot, chirp for composition with lots of room to crop.

Maybe this is because I use one lens mainly (60mm on 60mb back) for landscape shooting, with a 120 for the occasional longer shots. Also printing to a modest size and there is a lot of room to work the files.

New tools, new approaches? Beats me.
 
Top