canon 5d mark 2

<p>I just purchased a canon 5d mark 2 with a Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L lens. My question is when I looked into the view finder, it doesn't show the full frame...is that normal? But when i use the live view, it shows full frame.</p>

<p>It is normal.<br>

0.71x/98 - viewfinder magnification/% of coverage.<br>

If this explanation makes sense to you ? as below:</p>

<p>Film cameras, e.g. 6x6 ( or 60mm x 60mm) actually had 56mm x 56mm picture image. The 2 mm edges on each side were to hold the film flat in the camera, and in the enlarger.</p>

<p>I believe the same idea was applied to 35 mm film camera. However, it makes less sense here, since the 35 mm film has sprockets on each side, thus any loss of frame was not really necessary, neither for the camera, nor the enlarger.</p>

 

<p>Study the specs on page 213 of your manual: 98% frame coverage. If you need 100% coverage, return the 5D2, get on a waiting list and fork over another $4000 for a 1DX...</p>

<p>Sort of on this subject: Is there any reason it should be expensive or technically difficult to construct a 100% coverage VF? I've always thought this incomplete coverage rather weird.</p>

<p>I think it's cheaper and easier to build/design a viewfinder on a prism SLR to have a less than 100% viewfinder. It may have something to do with the size of the mirror.</p>

<p>The very latest, top-of-the-line Canons (I think) do have 100% coverage, but even the top old film classics were around 97-98%. Canon often weaseled on it by stating something like 'virtually full view' or so.</p>

<p>This is one place where the Nikon F line are "better" in my estimation. Back to the original Nikon F, the prism finder was 100%.</p>

<p>The old excuse for it was that the slide mount masked out part of the edges, but its persistence into the digital age suggests some more fundamental ($$) reason.</p>

<p>The difference with the 5DII should be very small (2% as mentioned). Glasses wearers sometimes have additional difficulty as they have their eyes further away from the viewfinder and thus see less than the 98%.<br>

The ability to see beyond the frame is one of the beauties of a Leica rangefinder. First you can focus with your right eye and keep your left eye open. With the viewfinder on the left end of the camera there is nothing in front of your left eye. Secondly if you shoot a lens that is longer than 28mm (with a 0.72 Viewfinder) you can see outside the frame. Henri Cartier-Bresson used a 50mm lens mainly and this probably gives the best view of what is outside the frame. He was thus able to see things coming into the frame.</p>

<p>JDM, when considering the construction of an SLR viewfinder, I feel these things are probably true:</p>

<p>(1) The mirror size could probably be smaller than it usually is -- more trapezoidal in shape, and perhaps a bit shorter -- but that would cause a bit of vignetting in the margins, especially when using lenses with large rear elements. My point, by extension, is that a very slightly larger coverage area would probably not require more mirror, if a tiny (negligible?) amount of vignetting is acceptable.</p>

<p>(2) The mirror box, focusing screen and pentaprism assembly could in theory be larger than the sensor. Why not?</p>

<p>I can see some utility to having maybe a 110% coverage frame with an engraved marking in the focusing screen indicating the 100% bounds. We had this feature on many crappy P&S 35mm cameras from back in the 80's. Why not on medium/high end DSLR cameras? Would this add weight? Yes, a tiny bit. It would also make the camera a tiny bit larger, but not by much. At the very least, why not 100%. It doesn't seem to me like it would a difficult feat or an unreasonable thing to ask.</p>

 

<p>I have to say I do wish the 5DII had a 100% viewfinder. It's a small thing in some ways, but irritating.</p>

<p>I usually say don't make the perfect the enemy of the good. The 5D2 has a great big, bright viewfinder that is a joy to use. Why sit around moaning about 100%. Go take pictures and enjoy the results. Good Luck!</p>

<p>In the film days when there were slides or negative holders that intruded into the frame I couldn't care less, but now it would seem a small thing to get right. Of course Canon make us pay to get a 1 series to get the 100% viewfinder, the cunning devils.</p>

<p>7D is not high end, but it does have 100% viewfinder coverage. </p>

I'd say this doesnt mean any thing to me if 5d2 was made 100%coverage then some one will ask about 110%.

most of the photographers interest is not going out of the grid lines

Honestly who concentrate on the edge

Furthrmore some times even we shot with the cam is over our head specially in crowdy situation or it is mounted on

monopod set the timer to 2s take it on top of the crowds

It is you and the cemera how you welling to know it deeply