Eye glasses

[jessica_marshall1]

<p>I wear glasses and need them to see clearly through the view finder. I am starting to think that maybe my glasses are one of the reasons I am not getting a sharp focus. Is there any way of correcting that or something I can get for my camera to fix this problem?</p>

[wade_roth]

Some camera bodies have a diopter adjustment knob near the view finder. This lets you dial in the view finder to your specific needs. You might have to look in your cameras manual to see if your camera supports this.

Good luck.

--Wade

[swilson]

<p>If you have good sharp vision using your glasses then there should be no problem using them with a camera. My only problem is I have bifocals so I have to be careful to use the top part of my glasses where they are set for distant vision.</p>

[gulfbeach47]

<p> I HATE HAVING TO WEAR GLASSES!!! I can never keep them clean the way the optical stores do and I keep my eye brows clipped very short or the oils always get on the glass! Argghhhhhhhh! I would probably get contacts or lasik eye surgery but since one of my eyes is 20/300, I cannot get contacts or surgery. Using the diopter helps some but I think it is time for another pair of glasses. I also progressive lens and it is very hard to get a good focus.</p>

[mark_sirota1]

<p>Can you see the viewfinder indicators (like focus points) clearly?</p>

[faysal]

<p>There are photographer's glasses that to me look quite silly, but then again, maybe they wont when I need glasses in about 10 years.</p>

[lee_kee]

<p>i too have a pretty difficult time trying to get things into focus. my newbie solution is to let the camera stand on a tripod, connect the thing via USB to a computer, and adjust the focus while looking at a huge computer screen, works well indoors but would be impossible outdoors<br>

does anyone have a better solution for us 4 eyed monkeys?</p>

[lee_kee]

<p>mmm jessica i don't know how much this helps, i've only being holding a dslr for no more than 48 hours, so i'm not really that qualified for giving advice...<br>

but in my search for sharpness i just discovered something pretty counterinuitive. shooting at the best quality (Raw) is actually LESS sharp than JPEG because JPEG files comes with some post processing tricks that makes the image look sharper than it really is. <br>

this probably sounds pretty trivial to the pros, but assuming you're a newbie like me you probably turn all the quality dial way up just to see how much your shiny new camera can do and end up disappointed,if that's the case just turn the quality dials down, lower quality (still 15 MB) jpeg image actually looks sharper, has more contrast, etc than the ultra high quality unprocessed raw images.</p>

<p> </p>

[ted_raper1]

<p>I also wear glasses - bifocals - and there are two issues when looking through the camera viewfinder. One is being able to see the viewfinder info, which is a closeup function, and the other is of course focus, which requires distance correction. So as Scott says, you have to be careful as to where the bifocal line blends.</p>

<p>My solution is that I have a whole separate pair of glasses I use when using my DSLR. For one reason, I can put the lens right up next to the viewfinder and nor worry about scratching the glasses because they are my "secondary" ones. And for two, the distance/closeup blend in this pair is set perfectly to be able to see the viewfinder info and then look through the lens for proper focus at distance.</p>

[michael_s10]

<p>I am assuming that you are using autofocus...if not, this is a whole different discussion (maybe). </p>

<p>In any case, could you post an example of one of your out of focus photos? That would help diagnose the core issue. (Also, what type of camera are you using?)</p>

<p>I have pretty bad eye sight (keratoconus) - I can't judge whether or not an image is in focus through the view finder, and I have to use my left eye.</p>

<p>When I was starting out, I did have out of focus image issues. In the end, I discovered that it was all about knowing how to operate the equipment properly.</p>

<p>I think that even if I did have perfect eye sight, that the view finder still would not show me with sufficient detail if I was dead on in focus.</p>

 

[mark_pierlot]

<blockquote>

<p>hooting at the best quality (Raw) is actually LESS sharp than JPEG because JPEG files comes with some post processing tricks that makes the image look sharper than it really is.<br>

<br />[T]his probably sounds pretty trivial to the pros, but assuming you're a newbie like me you probably turn all the quality dial way up just to see how much your shiny new camera can do and end up disappointed, if that's the case just turn the quality dials down, lower quality (still 15 MB) jpeg image actually looks sharper, has more contrast, etc than the ultra high quality unprocessed raw images.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, but unlike JPEGS, RAW files can be processed <em>ad infinitum </em>with no loss in quality. Every time a JPEG file is sharpened or otherwise processed, data is lost. </p>

<p>I personally do all my processing in RAW, and then convert to JPEG or TIFF as required.</p>

[jaydesi]

<p>I would say that if you can't switch to contacts, check the diopter adjustment on your viewfinder and set it as close to your correction level as possible. If you're focusing manually, this may not be sufficient, and you'll need to get a special eyepiece made for you by your optician. I usually wear contacts, but if I happen to have my glasses on, I take them off and rely on the camera's AF to focus. I find it very difficult to wear glasses and hold a camera up to my eye. If you're using autofocus, you really don't need to see things in focus yourself if the camera tells you your focus point is set. You might miss a few shots, but in general, AF is pretty good, if you set your focus point properly.<br>

I also shoot manual with a Pentax K1000 SE, but that has a split prism that usually is fairly easy to judge when things are in focus, even with glasses on. So unless you're trying to manually focus a camera by perceived sharpness through the viewfinder, you'll have to rely on the camera, either through AF or through the diopter adjustment.</p>

[lachaine]

<p>With SLR's, it's very nearly impossible to focus manually on some if not all autofocus cameras, because they have no focussing aids whatsoever. You have to actually see the frame in focus, and you can't do that if you don't wear your glasses, or if your glasses have grown to be not quite right for your vision. I'm not up on the latest cameras, but the old manual focus SLRs had focussing aids. You either had to align a spot that was split in the middle, or focus so that the little spots in the microprism didn't shimmer anymore. You could do that even with no glasses, and it would be in perfect focus.</p>

[mark_stevens9]

<p>As a "four-eyed" shooter, I agree that manual focusing is difficult, and even checking auto-focusing can be touchy at times. I plan on upgrading soon to a 7D. One great bonus (among many) is that it has a bigger viewfinder. I tried out my friend's 7D and the difference in size is amazing from the Rebel series.<br>

I did not try it out but wonder if the "Live View" function might be of help to some people, too?</p>

 

[keith_bogut]

<p>I have a slightly different problem, and I'm surprised no one else has mentioned it. I wear glasses, and while focusing doesn't present any particular problems, I find that because my glasses keep my eye further from the viewfinder than if I didn't wear them, I have trouble seeing the edges of the frame. I'm constantly surprised (and usually disappointed) that my composition is not what I'd expected. It's not a huge problem, and I can usually fix it in PS, but sometimes I cut off something I wanted in. Anyone else have this experience?</p>

[jessica_marshall1]

<p>That is one of the problems I have. I usually take my glasses off to shoot with my Fujifilm point and shot and just use the auto focus, however my Nikon f55 suffers from a failed auto focus that needs to be fixed under recall (when ever I get around to sending it in) so I have to manually focus meaning I need my glasses on making my field of vision is messed up. I am thinking that when I get my new camera that I am saving up for I am going to get something made up to correct my problem.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>This is one reason why I prefer SLRs with long eye relief viewfinders (what Nikon calls "high eye point"). With my F3HP film SLR and D2H dSLR I can see the entire frame while wearing my no-line bifocals, and don't need to mash the camera up against my face. I only need to adjust the viewfinder diopter to suit the eyeglasses (about 2 clicks on the + side from neutral) to correct the viewfinder focus.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, to get a top quality long eye relief finder that's also bright and crisp enough to facilitate manual focusing, you need to pony up for the more expensive cameras. Viewfinder quality is one of the areas where manufacturers cut corners a bit in order to provide affordable high resolution dSLRs for the entry and mid-level markets.</p>

<p>BTW, one of the drawbacks to the long eye relief/high eye point finders is the lower magnification. Some folks don't like this aspect of the high eye point Nikon viewfinders. For example, the D2H finder is around 0.86 x magnification, and the F3HP finder is pretty close to that. Some folks are willing to sacrifice long eye relief and a virtual 100% view of what the camera will photograph for higher viewfinder magnification. Everything is a compromise.</p>