>> |
Anonymous
3. Most people don't like them, but I love EVFs. I think their bad reputation comes from people trying to use them the same way as an SLR finder- which makes sense, after all they're made to seem that way by the design of the camera and how they're TTL finders. But the way I've found to use them is to keep one eye open and on the scene with the lens set at a focal length one can mentally compose loosely (the stepped zoom on these cameras helps with that), and the other on the finder for precise framing. Like you described in a thread recently doing with the center AF point when shooting infrared, the viewfinder image sort of floats in the field of vision. Set the precise edges with that, watch for the decisive moment and the general scene with the other eye. Becomes totally natural and instant with practice, and it suits, at least for me, shooting these subjects. Completely different working methods than shooting with an SLR. Both nice in their own way. For most photographers, a DSLR is the thing to go for. But these things have their niche, too, even if it's usually unrecognized by consumers and camera companies. Just like how rangefinders and TLRs were designed for general use, but eventually wound up niche tools because of their disadvantages. And except for the thing about long, small, close-focusing lenses, compacts serve this too, like Alex Majoli and Heavyweather are doing, but personally, I prefer the handling of these. The large grips and thicker lens to hold onto, I guess. And I'm probably not alone in that. But that's all up to preference.
So they're very limited- noisy at high ISOs in the image quality sense, not good despite their fields of view for shooting sports or wildlife or any of the other stuff people usually use long telephotos for- but within their limited province they work great.
I forgot about how 6x7 SLRs will usually go with a tripod- so let's say 35mm Rangefinders versus 645 SLRs.
|