Importance of viewfinder size

I would like to get an idea of how important the viewfinder size is, as I am

thinking of getting my first dSLR (XTi), and don't want to make a mistake. I

shoot mostly landscapes and portraits (no fast action).

 

So, my question is: given that my vision is very good, will I be restricted by

the viewfinder on the Canon XTi? Will I have trouble composing? Any other problems?

 

Thank you for your input.

You should check the camera out in person to see if it bothers you at all. It is very subjective. I refused to buy a DSLR until the Canon 5D came out, because that camera is full frame and has the full sized view finder. Other folks never had a problem with the smaller view finders. I am not sure anyone can give you the answer you are looking for. Go to a store and see for yourself and compare the different cameras.

<p>I agree with the first response: you have to try it yourself. You should also see if you're comfortable with the size, shape, and layout of the camera itself; the XTi is smaller than most SLRs, which is great for some people, not good for some people, and not really an issue for some people.</p>

 

<p>My first SLR was a <a href="http://www.mirandacamera.com/_modelinfo/modelinfo.htm#Sensomat" target="_blank">1970s-vintage manual-everything model</a> which I bought secondhand around 1980. When that died in the late 1990s, I got an advanced-amateur film SLR (Canon EOS Elan II). A few years later, I replaced that with another advanced-amateur film SLR (Elan 7E). Their viewfinders weren't identical, but they were all reasonably large and bright.</p>

 

<p>When I went digital, I got an EOS 20D. Its viewfinder is obviously not the same as the viewfinders of my previous cameras. And now that I'm used to the 20D, the viewfinder of my late father's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_EM" target="_blank">Nikon EM</a> (circa 1980) seems positively enormous.</p>

 

<p>Are the viewfinders of my previous cameras, my dad's camera, or the viewfinder of the 5D (I've never owned this model but have played with it a few times) nicer? Absolutely. But there has never been an occasion when I've looked through my 20D's viewfinder and thought "I can't get this shot because the viewfinder isn't good enough." It does its job. If I had a whole pile of additional money to spend on a body, I might indeed get a 5D, and the viewfinder would be nice, but the viewfinder would not be one of the reasons I upgraded.</p>

I find the 20D viewfinder good for composing- it's small so it's easy to see the edges of the frame but poor for manual focusing, especially in low light. It's possible to work around this limitation with prefocusing, using a distance scale, etc.

Thank you Juergen and Steve for your input.

 

I did hold the XTi, as well as 30D, 5D, and Nikon D80 (today at BestBuy). I can definitely see differences in those viewfinders (5D blew me away!), but I wanted to know whether my photography would be impeded by XTi's viewfinder, or it would just be nice to get a bigger one. If it is just nice, then I cannot justify spending more money on 30D or D80 (even better VF than 30D), as I would rather spend money on good lenses. Steve's answer is what I was hoping for.

I think you'll do fine with the XTi. Bigger is better in a viewfinder, but if that was your only consideration you wouldn't buy ANY DSLR, none of them compare to a good 35mm SLR finder.

 

It really becomes important if you want to use a lot of manual focus lenses: then, not only the size of the finder but the way the focusing surface of the screen is constructed becomes much more important (the AF screens are not very good for manual focus, especially with fast lenses). If you plan to use the Canon EF lenses, the XTi screen is quite adequate.

"Bigger is better in a viewfinder, but if that was your only consideration you wouldn't buy ANY

DSLR, none of them compare to a good 35mm SLR finder."

 

I agree bigger is better but the generalization about DSLR VFs just ain't so! I find my 5D VF

better than both my old film cameras, e.g., Elan 7NE, Rebel Ti and EOS 5. It's a little brighter

than my EOS 3 but pretty close otherwise. The 1D series are even better...

I have an old Pentax MX with an after market Beattie Intenscreen and a 50mm f/1.7 lens on it. Every time I pick it up I am amazed at that viewfinder. Wow! So big, so bright, and so easy to focus with. They should all be like that.

 

I find the 20D, and XTi screen positively inferior in every way to the old Pentax, but it has never hampered me from composing well. Like Roger Smith, I find it a poor screen for manual focusing though. The 40D screen is better -- brighter & larger -- not by a great amount, but enough to make manual focusing easier.

Big viewfinders are more relaxing on the eyes. However, I have to question your choice of camera. If you don't shoot action, and shoot mostly landscapes, what is your reasoning for wanting a smaller-than-small-format camera? I would sugggest starting with a Mamiya 645 or C-series TLR, personally, or even an RB/RZ, which is a killer total system still made today. They are ultra cheap these days and will kill the Rebel for that kind of work, if you are really serious about wanting killer prints with the maxium amount of control and latitude, and won't whine about using film. You don't need high speed, you don't need autofocus, you don't need digital (as timeliness is usually not extremely important with landscapes), you don't need light weight, and you don't need an in-camera meter. In that case, why on Earth would you feel it a good idea to use a small SLR?

 

Keith

Thanks everyone for their input. I think I have enough votes to be comfortable buying the XTi.

 

Keith, a 645 system will not meet my needs when it comes to chasing my 3-year old and trying to take a photo of him. Also, I think I can print very nice 11x14, and an occasional 16x20 using the XTi without too much interpolation.

 

Thanks everyone again!

I think Keith was jerkin' your chain...

Some people seem to have a tough time with smaller viewfinders. Perhaps it's poor vision?

 

Anyway, I have never had a problem with the smaller viewfinders that one gets with cropped

cameras.

Old expression:

 

"In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king!"

It's probably largely a matter of personal taste. I am perfectly happy with the viewfinder on my 20D. I spent this last weekend shooting with a loaner 1Ds Mk II (drool), and had the viewfinder debate in the back of my mind the whole time. One overriding thought was "what's the big deal?" Personally I didn't see much difference beyond the scale of the information indicators (and the more comprehensive information). After spending three days jumping from one body to the other, to me it's a non-issue. One caveat though--I have the EP-EX15 extender (lens removed) and a KatzEye focus screen on my 20D.

Thank you for your response Chris. That is exactly the answer I was hoping for.