D700 Viewfinder - it is indeed 90%

[photo5]

Doing some more testing with the D700. It is indeed a 90 percent viewfinder. It is missing pixels on the side, as

well as on the top and on the bottom of the frame. Which is a shame but I suppose it is the price we pay for a

compact full-frame Nikon. Other than the grip being a little chunkier (if that is a word) than the D300, it feels

just like my D300 and I am really enjoying using my 50mm f1.8 and actually getting all the coverage from it. The

D300 will go up on the auction site soon, I'm afraid.

[photo5]

Another thing. One change I really REALLY like over the D300 is the metering mode switch on the rear of the body to the right of the viewfinder. They've moved the choices from the left to the top, with the white mark on the three position dial showing clearly. I had found my D300 accidently moved to center-weighted from matrix a couple of times. Now if that happens I will notice it more quickly, I hope!!

[michael s.]

Nikon claims "approx 95%" in the viewfinder specs, but I haven't even seen the camera yet, so I'm certainly not arguing.

 

http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25444/D700.html

[curt wiler]

It is 95% in each linear dimension, which equals 90% in area. Hopefully the missing 5% is evenly distributed around the visible area. I believe this was not the case in one of the earlier cameras, where you had to know where the extra space would be added.

[joseph_wisniewski]

Unlikely.

 

The general reason for a less that 100% viewfinder is precision. It's a lot easier to get the frame placed properly within 1mm, mask it down to 23x35, and end up with a 95% finder. Typically, the larger error is vertical, the horizontal centering is pretty good, and they could probably make the frame 23x36 and have it work out pretty well...

[azn137]

I'm sure they invented PP for a reason, no??

[Ian Rance]

Dave,

 

What I was concidering doing was using a digital compact, and taking a photo through the viewfinders of my various cameras which have different percentage viewfinders. It would show 92%, 93%, 96% and 100%. However, if you are able to do this using the digital Nikons (I have the film bodies) you could show what the viewfinder sees, then what the sensor sees, therefore showing where and what information is 'missing' in the finder.

 

It may be a good reference in the future were similar questions to be asked.

 

Ian

[photo5]

Ian, yes that would be rather easy to do. I'll see if I can get to it this weekend.

[ilkka_nissila]

Nikon made the D700 viewfinder 95% because they needed space for the sensor

cleaner, which limited the mirror size and the viewfinder coverage. It's nothing to do with the precision of the viewfinder.

[joseph_wisniewski]

My F100 and FM2 have no sensor cleaner.

[a._valerio]

How are viewfinders normally evaluated - linear or area?

[lex_jenkins]

<i>"How are viewfinders normally evaluated - linear or area?"</i><p>

 

Both. Manufacturers typically use linear because their glasses are half full. Some users prefer area because their glasses are half empty.

[bourboncowboy]

If you're measuring the difference between 90 and 95% on viewfinders, you've got too much free time. Go out and shoot.

[ilkka_nissila]

Joseph, I was talking about the D700, the F100 or the FM2 are not relevant.

[ShunCheung]

This is a test I always wanted to do ever since I got my D700.

 

I put four magnets on a metal garage door to mark the corners of the frame as it appears in the viewfinder of my D700. I placed them so that the entire magnets were all inside the frame, right at the four corners. Clearly this is not extremely accurate but does give you an idea what you can see. I then captured the image.

 

The entire D700 frame is 4256 x 2832 pixels. The viewable area is approximately 4027 x 2670 pixels based on my somewhat rough observation. Therefore, as far as area goes, what is in the viewfinder is actually about 89.2% of the entire frame, and at least on my D700, it is not centered. As you can see it youself, a bit more is left out on top and on the left side of the frame.

 

Currently I don't have another D700 body to test, but it could well be slightly different on another sample.

 

I have had my D700 for a couple of months now and have taken it to two trips. This 89% viewfinder has been a bit of an issue but at least to me, not all that major.<div></div>

[ShunCheung]

Just for comparison, here is the same test with the D300, which is supposed to have a 100% viewfinder. It is certainly much closer to 100% then the D700, but the D300 is more like 95, 96%.<div></div>

[joseph_wisniewski]

Ilkka, I gave my example to show that it's simply cameras a level below the "top dog" that don't have 100% viewfinders, regardless of whether or not they have sensor cleaners.

 

Shun's experiment shows that the mirror sees more than 90% of the focus screen, and it really is an issue of precision (which translates to cost) that keeps them from giving it a larger viewfinder coverage.

 

A sensor cleaner means simply vibrating structures that are already in front of the sensor, as an engineer, I can't see how this would limit the ability to have a 100% viewfinder. The D3 (100% finder) has a mirror articulation point some 6mm below the focusing screen rear edge, there is an enormous amount of spare room in that system.

[ilkka_nissila]

Joseph, the sensor cleaner of the D700 takes space from the mirror box (look inside, please), and this is why they had to

reduce the viewfinder coverage. The information is from Nikon through Bjorn Rorslett. The accuracy of the D700 viewfinder

is not why they decided to go <100%. If you can fit a full size mirror into that mirror box with the particular sensor cleaner

they used, show us how.

[bjørn rørslett]

People should also remember that Nikon always states "approx. 100%" and with a specific lens as a reference (50mm).

[ShunCheung]

I should point out that for the D700 test image, I used my 28-70mm/f2.8 AF-S at 50mm, as I have never bought any 50mm Nikon lens, ever. Therefore, that was as close to 50mm as I could get at home.

 

For the D300 image, it was the 17-55mm/f2.8 AF-S DX at 32mm.

 

Is 89.2% "approximately the same" as 100%? :-)

[bjørn rørslett]

Shun: I was refering to the assertion that a 100% finder actually is 100% view of the frame. Nikon expressedly states "approx. 100%" and for good reasons (not related to production tolerance but optics).

 

Your observation on the D700 confirms the manufacturer's specification of 95% linear (= 90% planar) frame view.

[ShunCheung]

Right Bjorn, I was just kidding a bit earlier.

 

However, I wish Nikon would provide the area covered in the official information instead of the linear 95% figure, which I find misleading.

 

Moreover, if you pay closer attention to my test image, what I observed in the D700's viewfinder does not quite turn out to be a

perfect rectangle in the final image. The image in the viewfinder is "twisted" a tiny bit. Clearly, the viewfinder optics is

not perfect. But the difference is so tiny that it shouldn't matter in real life shooting, at least in most situations.

 

If you really demand high precision in your composition, live view should be the better way to go instead of the optical

viewfinder.

[photo5]

Shun,

 

Thanks for doing this test! I find the exact same results with my D700 just shooting with it and reviewing the image on the LCD. It's not aligned, you get more extra pixels on the left compared to the right. Do you think Live View shows 100 percent? That would be nice, but I've never found an area when I need Live View. Perhaps I need to change my thinking and start using it!

[ShunCheung]

Live view should give you 100% of the image.

[steve_larese1]

Shun,

 

Thanks for posting this test, it's exactly the sort of thing I've been looking for.