need director's finder good for FX

<p>I'm looking for a basic director's viewfinder, which would be good for still 35mm (FX) photography. There's plenty to choose from and B&H and Adorama carry quite a few. My concern is that all of the models are basically for cinematography and videography. All those I've checked out had a separate scale for 35mm but I know, of course, that motion picture 35mm film format is not what I'm looking for. What do I do? I need to be able to tell which focal length I should use and it has to be pretty exact. Then there's the aspect ratio that has to be 2:3.<br /> So, has anyone used one of these for still photography? There's really a lot of them out there, probably too many, so there's got to be something for me.<br /> The range I'm interested in is about 20 to 300mm and I <em>would </em>buy accessories that can either meet or expand this range. The size of the picture in the viewfinder is also important. Naturally, the bigger - the better. I'll be also using the finder for night photography, so if some model is really dim, I would have to pass.<br /> The finder has to be small enough to fit in a pocket.<br /> The most I would pay is probably around $350 but that's not really my absolute limit, plus the thing doesn't have to be available at Adorama or B&H. I would have no problem with buying one (even used) from ebay or pretty much any other site. The most important thing is that it has to be good for what I need to do with it.<br /> <br />Thanks.<br /> PS: If you're about to suggest an 'iPhone' or some other DIY solution, please save your time as I'm not interested.</p>

<p>I won't suggest an iPhone. I <i>will</i> suggest a cheap film SLR (preferably one with a 100% finder, unless you want to apply a crop factor) and a cheap superzoom lens like a 28-300. Is that too bulky? (It's likely to be a fair bit smaller than a decent full-frame DSLR.) Just a thought.</p>

<p>But ... a simple, inexpensive pocketable digicam with a superzoom and 10 seconds of math can tell you exactly what you need to know, and do some metering and other handy things for you, too. Plus it allows you to actually record the scene/composition for some visual note-taking, which can help with planning a return visit/setup.<br /><br />EDIT: I see that Andrew and I are on a similar page, here.</p>

<p>Andrew, I didn't mention the 'cheap film SLR + a super zoom lens', because it was very obvious. It was so obvious, that in fact it was the first thing that came to my mind. Unfortunately, it's not the kind of solution that I'm looking for.<br>

I do have my old Nikon D70s and a beat-to-hell Sigma 28-300, which I got for free. I use them for scouting shots, albeit rarely. I want a proper finder for situations when none of my photo gear is with me. That's why I said I that needed something that can fit in a shirt/vest pocket.<br>

Matt: How wide can those pocket digicams go? Not very, I figure.. nothing equivalent to 20mm in the 135 format anyway... so no help there..<br>

I thank you for the creative but rather common solutions but I need a proper director's viewfinder. There's a million formats out there and almost all finders have quite a few to choose from. Many offer the selection of the aspect ration. There has got to be something that should work for me.</p>

<p>Understood, David. (I have the Sigma 28-300 in a Canon fit. I'm not surprised you got it for free!)</p>

 

<blockquote>That's why I said I that needed something that can fit in a shirt/vest pocket.</blockquote>

 

<p>Actually, I don't think you did. Hence my unhelpful response! I'd assumed "coat pocket" - sorry about the confusion. There are a few zooms (generally not very pocketable) that will go to 22mm, and a Casio fixed-lens thing that'll do 21mm equivalent, though all generally in 4:3 - 24mm is a bit more common. I concur that if you want specifically 20mm in 135, you're a bit stuck. (You might get something pocketable if you adapted a very wide rangefinder lens to a NEX, but it wouldn't zoom and you'd still be stretching your pocket.)<br />

<br />

Good luck with your hunt.</p>

<p>I remember shopping for a finder about 10 years ago but not being able to find anything. Since then I pretty much locked myself up in my studio. I haven't done any serious outdoor work in many years. Now I'm gradually getting back 'outside' and a proper finder is what I really need (among other things). Sadly the selection of director's finders hasn't been updated. It's the same thing all over again. Thought there would be some progress by now. Oh, well... I know I'll figure something out because I have no choice.</p>

<p><em>If you want to train your eye, do not go around and look through a viewfinder. Buy a camera and do great photos. So you have the chance, too look at them later and see what worked and what didn't. You also have the chance to do some kind of grading in Photoshop.</em></p>

<dl id="profile6838" ><dt>David, this is an answer to your Q from top notch cinematographer (pasted). This would also apply to video. I was going to suggest Cavision (higher model and costing around $380), but most of those only reach 200mm and they don't appear very 'pocketable'. Even the most popular one/s (from memory) like the Alan Gordon model would give you what you want to a point....but not reaching the 300mm that you desire. Other than that you could adopt...say 50-300 in true 35mm, but you'll need to go to the gym. Nor a ($'s wise) reasonable solution.</dt><dt></dt><dt></dt><dt></dt><dt></dt><dt></dt><dt></dt><dt></dt><dt>As it has been suggested, get a small cam that's equivelent (smaller sensor) to 35mm...and convert.</dt><dt></dt><dt></dt><dt></dt><dt></dt><dt></dt><dt></dt><dt></dt><dt>Les</dt><dt></dt><dd></dd></dl>

<p>Got an iphone?<br>

<a href="http://philipbloom.net/2009/11/19/directors-viewfinder-app-for-iphone/">http://philipbloom.net/2009/11/19/directors-viewfinder-app-for-iphone/</a></p>

<p>Ebay?<br>

<a href="http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=director%20viewfinder&clk_rvr_id=452334477359&adpos=1o1&crlp=12109675444_2416792&MT_ID=69&tt_encode=raw&keyword=director+viewfinder&geo_id=10232&adgroup_id=3261797884&crdt=0">http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=director%20viewfinder&clk_rvr_id=452334477359&adpos=1o1&crlp=12109675444_2416792&MT_ID=69&tt_encode=raw&keyword=director+viewfinder&geo_id=10232&adgroup_id=3261797884&crdt=0</a></p>

<p>There are many diverse DIY mods on the web too, to build a range of director viewfinders. They range from silly to sublime.</p>

<p>Personally, I use a p&S digital camera as a light meter (spot, histogram, whole lot of info therein) when I go about with my 4x5. I also use an ambient meter too. But considering the P&S camera can zoom and 'mimics' various focal lengths as a quick look-see before some serious under darkcloth time, it saves a lot of time, effort and grief for me.</p>

<p>Plus, as stated, I can take a shot with it to for any variety of reasons.</p>

<p>Jim</p>

<p>Why do people think that an LCD image is somehow equivalent to direct observation? Viewing your scene on a tiny LCD screen is NOTHING like looking at it through some even mediocre optics. I use my photo equipment to do serious work and not some social-recording-casual-weekend-photo-snapping. Among many things I stitch panoramas, I do HDRs, some real high contrast going on there. How would a tiny P&S cope with ranges of brightness that can't even be accommodated by a human eye? What if it's broad daylight? What if direct sunlight is falling on the screen? How good is it then? Now I need to try to cover the LCD, or take a picture and view it under a coat. Yeah, right... I want to OBSERVE the scene, study it, figure out a composition and NOT just determine lens coverage. What if it's a moonless night? How good will your P&S be then? Will it be able to even pick up ANY KIND of super-grainy image? A compact P&S may be a workable solution for you but to me any P&S is GARBAGE. I do thank everyone who's trying to help but please stop suggesting solutions that involve any type of electronic displays. </p>

<p>I don't understand why you want a director's finder.<br />In the movie world, directors' finders were developed because the cameras are big and heavy. You can't just put a lens on a Mitchell BCNR (really old days) or Arri BLIV and hold it up to see what you'd get.. And also, the lens the director wants to look through might be in use by the camera operator sitting up the next shot. (Not to mention that it's a different union that might frown on the director touching the gear.) In still photography, the camera is small and light enough you can easily put a lens on it and point it where you want. And you're usually working alone, so it's not like somebody else is using the lens.</p>

<p>Why do people think that an LCD IPS image is somehow epuivalent to direct ?<br>

<a href="http://onaprsc.com.vn">http://onaprsc.com.vn</a></p><div></div>

<p>I looked at this viewfinders but find them way too expensive for something that does not take a picture. How about a paper cutout in the correct proportions? Attach it to an extendable lanyard that you wear around your neck. On the lanyard you mark off the distances you hold the cutout away from your face corresponding to your lenses, for wide angle close to your face, for tele as far as your arm can reach. Or prepare different size cutouts for different lenses.</p>

<p>How would a cardboard cutout and a piece of string simulate the different perspectives you get with each focal length? I already said that what I needed was a serious instrument which would go WAY beyond determining lens coverage... I have already placed an order for a proper director's finder, what I should have done 11 years ago.</p>

<p>Your lens selection does not change the perspective. Your distance to the object does. What your lens does is project a larger or smaller view on your film or digital sensor. Differently sized cutouts would simulate this effect just like the old wire frame sports finders.</p>

<p>I'd rather shoot myself in the eye.</p>

<p>Okay... (We <i>are</i> trying to help, David.)<br />

<br />

Firstly, David, what exactly are you expecting a director's finder to give you beyond lens coverage/framing? I was under the impression that this is <i>exactly</i> what they provide. I've never heard of one containing, for example, a meter.<br />

<br />

An LCD won't represent the entire dynamic range that the eye can see in one go, and I'm perfectly happy with the prism on my DSLR - but since a director's finder won't tell you anything about metering anyway, I'm not sure how one would lose out with an LCD, with the understanding that I'm not aware of any compact cameras (unless you count a NEX with a rangefinder wideangle on it) able to go out to 20mm. The reason a compact with an LCD is grainy in low light is because it's using a small lens and not capturing much light; a small optical finder (directors' or otherwise) will be equally dim to look down, and the eye will struggle nearly as much as a modern sensor. Please bear in mind that compacts have got a lot better in low light over time, and that LCD screens have got a lot brighter (for daylight use) as well - you may still need to dismiss an electronic solution, but there's a reason that modern electronics are considered increasingly acceptable and mirrorless cameras are popular. Of course, for 20mm you could get one of the accessory finders that get shipped with wide rangefinder lenses, or maybe consider one of the low quality "wide angle adaptors" on a conventional lens, but they're admittedly not ideal.<br />

<br />

A cardboard cut-out and a piece of string will emulate the different angle of view for different focal lengths <i>by changing the length of the string</i>. The relationship really is that simple - I wouldn't dismiss the cardboard cut-out solution just because it's cheap.<br />

<br />

Still, I hope the mini-telescope solution works for you and covers the desired range - I assume you've now found one that does. I'm sorry we weren't able to help more - as you've said, these things tend to exist for videography, but for still photography people have tended just to use a camera, often because it's not much larger than the finder would be.<br />

<br />

(A bit belatedly, a note that Nikon sell an F-mount telescope adaptor that lets you put an eyepiece on the back of a camera lens. I suspect it crops, otherwise it might let you check the field of view of your actual lenses. Might be worth checking, but if you're worried about it being pocketable then I suspect anything with a 300mm lens attached isn't going to suit you.)</p>

<p>You really are trying to help, Andrew, and I previously did thank everyone for their input. However, in my original post I did point out that I wasn't interested in any type of DIY solutions because I knew exactly where this would go. Don't you people think that I already researched this thing? I can google, I can search on ebay, I know what's available out there and I did see this under-a-dollar-DIY-tie-a-rope-around-your-neck-become-the-town's-laughingstock gadget. I also found out about all kinds of questionable Chinese and old Russian finders. It made me think there was more stuff out there, not readily available online. Before actually settling on any kind of finder I figured it was worth it to get a second opinion from this forum. Once it's been confirmed that something with my requirements simply did not exist I went ahead and bought the next best thing. Now, because everyone's been nice and because I'm a generally polite individual, I will actually describe what I ordered as well as provide my thoughts on it.<br>

First of all... why do I even need a director's finder? There's about a million reasons but I'll state just a few. I have a permanent wrist injury, which means I can't hold a bulky camera with a heavy lens on it for very long. 95% of my shots are taken with the camera mounted on a tripod. I have to plan each shots ahead but first I want to determine whether I even want to take it. I need to see if it's even doable. Anytime I'll be studying a scene through my new viewfinder I will always have my old Sekonic L-608 meter right with me. By the time (and if) I mount a lens and set my camera on the tripod I will know that I definitely want that shot, taken from that very spot, with the lens that I just mounted AND it can be properly exposed. The list can go on and on but one HUGE bonus is that instead of clenching my teeth in pain throughout the whole thing, I'll be able to focus on the task before me.<br>

What I bought is the Cavision VDL-11X finder. It's far bigger and heavier than what I had in mind but unlike its compact counterpart it's adjusted via 'rotation'. This means, at least in theory, that I'll be able to paint a little dot somewhere on the existing scale and use it to tell me the real focal length in the 135 format. It should go wider than 20mm but it probably won't even reach 200mm. Well, it has a 49mm filter thread and that means that I can use all sorts of optical attachments available on the market. I can also attach them via step-up/step-down rings. I'd just have to figure out what each such setup would mean in terms of the actual focal length. If you think of it, though, with any of those additional lenses, the finder becomes a huge and heavy hunk of glass and metal. I have no choice here but to bite the bullet, so instead of my shirt pocket I'll have to carry it in a little pouch, or in my vest pocket (whenever I'll wear it). On the upside, I don't think that I'll be looking at a tiny, dim image with this finder but I'll have to see about that, won't I?</p>

Thank you for explaining, David. It's not uncommon for people to ask questions here with "obvious" answers (I ask a few myself), so

apologies if you felt we weren't giving you credit for doing your own research. I'm sorry that photography is painful for you - I hope your new

finder helps you as you hope. (And I hope the image isn't too dim as well.)

 

In the future, I hope an augmented reality solution can solve your problem more conveniently - an adjustable LCD frame built into some

glasses sounds like the ultimate solution - but I hope the old school solution works for now!

I'm a little late to the party, but for a range narrower than what you specify but not too far off, one solution is the viewfinder accessory for an old rangefinder camera. I don't know what can be found at a reasonable price, but for example I have aTewe "Polyfocus" finder for the old Barnack Leicas whch provides a smooth zoom between 35 and 200 millimeters. It's marked with the major focal lengths along the way. I imagine other such things exist.

 

I am a little surprised by the suggestion of mini cameras. All the ones I can think of are in 4:3 ratio rather than 35 mm., and I think it would be pretty hard to figure out what the actual focal length is. Older mini film cameras would have the right ratio, but I don't recall any zooms that returned the focal length of the lens.

 

Alas, I looked briefly at the internet here, and suspect that the rangefinder viewfinder is not likely to show up at a reasonable price, but there do seem to be a few out there, and one might get lucky.

Over 5 years too late Matthew!

 

However, the question of aspect ratio is pretty pertinent. Because why would someone need a director's finder if they have an actual camera to hand? Reason - they are an actual director and need to see what the camera sees without looking through it, and most cine aspect ratios aren't 3:2 like Barnack's daft double-frame. So unlikely that a proper director's finder will support that aspect ratio.

 

A simple telescoping tube with a 3:2 mask on the end of it would have done what the OP required, without bits of string, cardboard frames or 'laughing stock' looks. But then maybe they'd have found some objection to that solution too?