Quality of the viewfinder

[RaymondC]

<p>After many yrs of the D70, I just got used to it. I also mainly used AF lenses to AF but I could compose my shot with the tunnerl VF.</p>

<p>I then got a FM2N and with the same lens, wow. I also apprec. the mechanics of the FM2N. Now I know why some prefer faster lenses than 2.8 :D With a AF 85mm 1.8 I could manual focus at night of buildings with ease.</p>

<p>Question: How does a F5 or F6 VF compare to the FM2N? I know the F100 isn't as good.</p>

<p>A bit off topic, I am looking at larger formats. Are LF and MF (not rangefinders) how bright are the VFs? The MF lenses are slower than 35mm formats generally. Much of them are also manual focus cameras.</p>

<p>Cheers.</p>

[mark liddell]

This is one reason I waited for full frame dslrs before switching from 35mm film. The D700 viewfinder is only slightly behind the one on my FM2.

 

You can't really generalise with MF and LF cameras since most of them have ground glass rather than viewfinders, With LF you need a cloth over your head to see the groundglass properly (a serious pain) but at 4x5" it's pretty nice :) I never had any problems even at almost night time with my RB67 using the popup magnifier and 90mm f/3.5 but there are brightscreen replacements for the glass. 645 cameras usually have a normal viewfinder and their lenses are often not that much slower than 35mm, 2.8, 3.5 are common. Viewfinder brightness is also not only dependant on the speed on the lens.

[walterh]

<p>The viewfinder of the F100 is not bad at all and close to the one of the F5, certainly if coming from a D70 :-)<br>

I find the difference in weight between F5 and F100 more relevant.<br>

For me (personal view) the F2 and F3 got the best viewfinders for MF in the range of former and current pro bodies, closely followed by the F5.</p>

[emiliogtz]

<p>My favorite viewfinder is the DP-20 on the F4. I prefer it over the DP-30 (F5) and the F3HP's. It's big, bright, uncluttered and It's the best for me when manually focusing. I too believe that the older finders found on manual cameras are better than today's counterparts. The latter are just too cluttered, small and dark.</p>

[mizore]

<p>Medium format cameras with interchangeable focusing screens can use split image circles, which I find most useful with my Hasselblad. Otherwise, it's a bit of a learning curve, not an impossible one. The pop up magnifiers built into most finders help immensely.</p>

<p> </p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>I second Emilio Gutierrez: F4 the best, closely followed by F3 (not counting the LCD display for shutter speed, of which the best that can be said is that it (still) works). Now, when I looked through the prism finder of my Rolleiflex SL66, that's an entirely different ballgame - talk about some real estate to have your eyes wander around in! Not necessarily all that bright and actually fairly grainy - but detail is visible you never see in a 35mm camera finder. Can only imagine how that looks on a LF camera.</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>Well, I have in front of me all the cameras in discussion. Your`s is a question I have made to myself several times.</p>

<p>I`d say the FM2n is a bit darker and for sure has a coarser groundglass that makes focusing a bit harder than on a F6 (I`m using for testing a 50/1.4AiS lens).</p>

<p>Same for the F3, the GG looks also coarser, I find slightly easier to focus on my F6.</p>

<p>The split image aid is definitive. It works even under extremely dim light, at the same level of rangefiders. It`s way easier to assure focus with the split image than on the F6`s GG.</p>

<p><em>Please notice that I have on both the F3 and FM2n no viewfinder optical correction, and on the F6 it is built-in and I have it properly adjusted. I`m testing under two cold light bulbs in my living room.</em><br /> <em><br /></em><br /> I`d say the main difference between the FM2n and the F3&F6 is the eveness of the viewfinder area, the FM2n show somekind of vignetting. Despite of this, the FM2N and the F3 are very close.</p>

<p>About LF and MF viewfinders, there are huge differences.<br /> MF cameras: I`d say the Mamiya 6, even with a slightly lower magnification viewfinder than on the F6 (+50/1.4), it`s easier to focus. The bright spot is "bright" not only under normal conditions but on much darker conditions. A 6x7 reflex viewfinder could be even darker than a F3, but things are bigger and clearer with the built-in focusing loupe (WL viewfinder). I don`t have a "standard" lens at hand, but I believe it`s easier to focus with a RZ+110+WLF loupe than on a F6+50.</p>

<p>LF cameras could have very different configurations. On mine (I currently use a Canham DLC and a Linhof Technika) I have removed any fresnels from them. I have had focusing problems with all the fresnels I owned and I use just single plain groundglasses. As you can imagine, viewing is a very difficult task specially with wide angle lenses, not as hard with tele lenses, and for sure way much darker. Once I`m using my Silvestri 6x loupe, perfect focus is assured.</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>Too late for editing... don`t forget that the F6 has an electronic rangefinder aid for less than optimal focusing environments.</p>

[david_carroll4]

<p>Comparing the F3HP and the F4/DP-20, I have to give the slight advantage to the F3 in terms of ease of seeing the entire field (I believe the eyepoint of the DE-3 finder is 25mm, compared with 20mm for the DP-20, so this makes sense). In every other respect - information readout, readout illumination, electronic focus confirmation, the F4/DP-20 wins hands down (both cameras have the same standard split image/microprism/matte screen). For the glasses wearer (like me), both of these finders are significantly easier to use than an FM/FE. However, compared with any of these, the D70S is like peering through a keyhole. I have tried using MF Nikkors on the D70S, and while the light weight and VF brightness are a revelation when compared with the standard 18-70 zoom, I found manual focusing to be just miserable. There is focus confirmation, but it just isn't as useful as that of the F4.</p>

[robert_hooper1]

<p>I found the pop-up folding finder of my Hasselblad bodies a hassle to use (dark). I fitted them all with a prism or chimney type finder. With a Hasselblad <a href="http://vintageclassiccamera.com/images/DSCN6033.JPG">chimney finder</a>, the view is vastly improved. However, brightness will not compete with any Nikon F film body prism finder. My limited ownership and experience using a Mamiya RB 6x7 system was similar to that of my Hasselblad in terms of finder brightness. In the case of the RB 6x7, I used a prism finder. Large format, (4x5 and up), are like looking into a dark abyss, and using a loupe on the ground glass is mandatory to check for sharpness.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>F5 and F6 both have nice viewfinders; the D700 is almost as good as the F5 (haven't used the F6 sufficiently to say how it falls in all of this) but the F5 viewfinder does show crisper fine detail pop in and out of focus more clearly than the D700. D3 is slightly worse than D700 in this respect; don't know if it is because of the slightly lower magnification or differences in the LCD overlay. I use a Canon 1-series screen modified to fit the D3 and that's slightly better than Nikon's original but none of these screens are as good for manual focus of fast lenses (i.e. f/2 and faster) as those screens developed for manual focus cameras (which are in turn worse than the modern screens when using slow lenses like f/4). Complicated... it would be nice if Nikon offered more screen options.</p>

[glenjo]

<p>Here's another thumbs up for the F100. It compares well to the manual SLR's I have used (mostly older Canon), and is better than the D200 I currently use. Biggest problem I see with the F100 (and this may affect other F series SLRs) is the inability to show f stop changes lower than 2.8 (i.e. DOF and brightness changes doesn't seem to change when f stop is changed). This is also noticeable on the D200. I've heard this explained as a by-product of how AF is done, but don't know if this affects all new SLR's or DSLRs.</p>

<p>Having a good enough VF was my critical decision point before switching to a DSLR. The D200 was the first affordable DSLR where the VF was good enough to switch.</p>

[scott_murphy_photography]

<p>I don't own an F5 or F6 but have used them before. My F2 screens are a little dark, but they were the brightest around during the 1970's and they are still very, very good. I love the screen on my F4 and actually prefer it over my D700 screen. I have a microprism screen on the D700 because the standard screen is not good at all for manual focusing and I really do not trust the focus confirmation, it is wrong as often as it is right, but I have the standard screen on my F4 and it pops in and out of focus quite well, except in the dimmest of light. I still keep trying to find a "K" screen for it but have been so far unsuccessful, they are as rare as hen's teeth. If there are any specular reflections, the F4 screen is very easy to focus, even in very dim light.</p>

<p> </p>