Mirrorless users, do you primarily use your viewfinder?

[ericgtr12]

I am still using my Canon 6D MKII DSLR camera and with Live View I get to see all of my exposure settings before I shoot in real time, however I still use my viewfinder for composition in almost all situations. I'm not sure if it's just because that's how I started out or what but it's always worked best for me, I then switch it over to Live View to tweak my other settings. Works great on a tripod but switching back and forth is too unwieldy for handheld.

It seems like Mirrorless would save me that extra step since you can see it all in the viewfinder but I thought I would throw this question out there.

 

[mollyc]

It depends. I do prefer to use a viewfinder; I find it negates the distractions in my periphery when shooting. But I do a lot of macro work with plants in the ground, or sometimes on a tripod inside and then it is easier to use the camera back, especially because I can tilt it. I'd rather use the camera back and get the shot that is at a weird angle than to not be able to shoot it at all.

But for just general shooting, my kids, landscapes, walking around, etc., I much prefer the EVF, and in bright sun the EVF works better anyway since it is recessed from the sun.

 

[fcortese]

still primarily using the view finder. It has all the info I need and ,with Fujifilm, I get to see the exposed picture and if using one of the film sims, what it will look like. I'm just so use to looking through the VF rather than the back screen.

 

[mackmgg]

I definitely still primarily use the VF, but definitely less than I did with the SLR. I do prefer the viewfinder, and really like that with mirrorless you get the exposure simulation in it.

But like Molly said, there are plenty of times where you're shooting at an awkward angle and for that obviously the display (and especially the tilty flippy screen) is the better option. With mirrorless as soon as you move your head from the viewfinder it switches to live view on the LCD without having to hit any buttons, so I do find myself doing this more often whereas with the SLR I'd probably contort myself a bit more before resorting to live view.

 

[ericgtr12]

still primarily using the view finder. It has all the info I need and ,with Fujifilm, I get to see the exposed picture and if using one of the film sims, what it will look like. I'm just so use to looking through the VF rather than the back screen.

Exactly, it also obscures outside light and allows me to see it far easier, while I can't see the actual exposure like you can with an EVF I do get to see the settings so there's that. BTW you have a very nice gallery!

 

[GrumpyCoder]

Can I still answer coming from DSLR (and SLR before that)? Except for a few compact cameras, I've always had mirrors in my cameras. I just bought my first "real" mirrorless camera today (coming from Canon DSLR), I've used a few before from friends, Sony A7, Canon, Leica SL/M, Panasonic, Olympus and always used the VF 98% of the time.

So after looking at Sony A7iii, A7R iv, Nikon Z6ii/7ii (looked at the Z fc online), Canon R6 and some of the Fuji offerings the past few weeks, I finally walked home with a Fuji X-T4 + 23mm f2.0 today. I don't know what it is with Fuji, but it seems to do everything for me. The handling is great, it reminds me in many ways of the Pentax ME (learned photography with it). If not the X-T4, I probably would have bought the Z6ii (or waited for X-H2 or X-T40) instead. I doubt my VF usage is going to change in the future, but only time will tell.

 

[Fravin]

I have been using Fujifilm X cameras since its launch. And I love their EVF. Specially because you can use it as a SLR one, with no compensation or exposure preview.

I would use the LCD only for viewing or showing the photos. In the early days of digital photography, using the LCD caused battery drain, so I made myself to avoid using it.

 

[Fravin]

I finally walked home with a Fuji X-T4 + 23mm f2.0 today. I don't know what it is with Fuji, but it seems to do everything for me. The handling is great, it reminds me in many ways of the Pentax ME (learned photography with it). If not the X-T4, I probably would have bought the Z6ii (or waited for X-H2 or X-T40) instead. I doubt my VF usage is going to change in the future, but only time will tell.

Nice choice. Fuji's XT4 is a terrific camera, fast as hell.

But I would choose another lens. this f2 serie from Fuji are not their best.

I love the Fuji's 16-55 f2.8! I think it's the best zoom lens I ever used.

There's another great Fuji lenses for try: 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2 Those are all great lenses with fantastic optics.

 

[someoldguy]

I use the EVF maybe 95% of the time . I find it blocks out distractions , and gives me the info I want (F-stop/shutter speed/ISO/level/focus). About the only time I use the rear display is if I'm shooting close to the ground . Usually the display is turned inward so as not to bother me . Probably also somewhat conditioned to using finders from several decades of sir/dslr/rangefinder use.

 

[GrumpyCoder]

Nice choice. Fuji's XT4 is a terrific camera, fast as hell.

But I would choose another lens. this f2 serie from Fuji are not their best.

I love the Fuji's 16-55 f2.8! I think it's the best zoom lens I ever used.

There's another great Fuji lenses for try: 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2 Those are all great lenses with fantastic optics.

Thank you. I picked the 23mm f2 for two reasons, the size/weight and weather resistance. It's also optically corrected. I like hiking and taking walks in the city in the rain/snow, so WR is important to me unless I'm using rain covers (which is annoying). And the size/weight makes it nice to carry around all the time. The 23 f1.4 is larger/heavier, not WR and slow/loud AF. There's a new version coming next year as it seems. The 35mm f1.4 will be replaced with a 33mm f1.4 WR.

I have the 16-55 f2.8 on my list, as well as the 50-140 f2.8 WR (that covers my FF equivalent 24-70/70-200 needs) and the 100-400. Those will be next, probably in that order. Not sure what to do in the 50mm range. 56mm f1.2 is not WR and slow/loud AF, the 50mm f1.0 is too heavy/large. I also want something wider than 23mm, so maybe 8-16 or 10-24 (both not perfect, one too heavy, the other not WR) or a prime. Will have to wait and see what next year brings and then decide. Will likely get the 16-55 and 50-140 later this year.

 

[Fishrrman]

I don't use the viewfinder, as much as I use the touchscreens on my Canon 77d and EOS R.

I find the "touch to focus" (and then hit the shutter button) and "touch to focus AND shoot" options VERY easy to use.

Why struggle to move the focus point around (in the viewfinder) when you can just "touch it on the display" -- at least, in most cases. Perhaps not all... just "most".

 

[GrumpyCoder]

Why struggle to move the focus point around (in the viewfinder) when you can just "touch it on the display" -- at least, in most cases. Perhaps not all... just "most".

What you say makes sense for the cameras you mention (they don't have joysticks). I'm curious though, have you tried AF point adjustment with a stick vs touch? If so, still the same opinion?

 

[ericgtr12]

I don't use the viewfinder, as much as I use the touchscreens on my Canon 77d and EOS R.

I find the "touch to focus" (and then hit the shutter button) and "touch to focus AND shoot" options VERY easy to use.

Why struggle to move the focus point around (in the viewfinder) when you can just "touch it on the display" -- at least, in most cases. Perhaps not all... just "most".

Yeah, it can be a struggle if there is a need but for the most part I'm not moving it around too much. My biggest issue is in regular daylight I struggle to see the screen and when I'm carefully framing I want to be able to see all the details. I will say though that the touch focus is next level good when you can see everything really clearly.

 

[jz0309]

6DII here and I use VF pretty much exclusively. For one, I use my 100-400 a lot and I can't really use the screen with that, maybe it's because I've used VF all my life, but my head and eyes move around the "scene" and I'm not looking at the screen to see what I want to take a photo of.
I've obviously played with the screen view and I can see the advantage for when you need to hold the camera up high to get a good shot, or when using a tripod ...
For normal day-to-day, I cannot see myself using a screen, but who knows?

 

[stillcrazyman]

I use the evf on the Fuji about 3/4 of the time. If I am getting down low or at some odd angle, then I’ll use the lcd on the back.

 

[ericgtr12]

6DII here and I use VF pretty much exclusively. For one, I use my 100-400 a lot and I can't really use the screen with that, maybe it's because I've used VF all my life, but my head and eyes move around the "scene" and I'm not looking at the screen to see what I want to take a photo of.
I've obviously played with the screen view and I can see the advantage for when you need to hold the camera up high to get a good shot, or when using a tripod ...
For normal day-to-day, I cannot see myself using a screen, but who knows?

Same here, I've really gotten into shooting low (right off the ground, example) shots and it's hard enough at my age to get down there, let alone in the middle of a street or somewhere you need to watch your surroundings. So I use the screen and I bought some kneepads at Home Depot and it's made a huge difference.

 

[Clix Pix]

EVF all the way for me! It eliminates distractions from the scene I'm composing, it cuts down on glare and light so that I can see what I am about to shoot, and I can see potential issues much better than I can on the LCD screen when holding the camera out at a distance from me.

One thing I love about mirrorless is the EVF and immediate Live View; I found Live View on a DSLR to be rather awkward and cumbersome and so rarely bothered with it. I also like having the amount of information in the EVF available to me that I choose, too, all right there at a glance.

For about a week I needed to use ointment in my right eye -- my "shooting eye" -- and immediately realized that it would not be a good idea to use my cameras with EVF at that time, as I sure didn't want to goop up the eyecup or the EVF itself! I used my iPhone for a couple of days, then my small RX100 M7, and just used the LCD screen on that camera for composing, etc. It did work, but I was reminded again of why I don't like using that method of shooting! In the bright sunlight I couldn't see the LCD screen at all, and I found holding the camera out in front so that I could compose the scene, etc., to be awkward as well. At least with a small, lightweight camera that was doable -- I wouldn't be able to do that with my larger A7R IV and most of my lenses!

I don't think I've ever bothered flipping out the LCD screen on my A7R IV -- just not my style! Usually I can manage to get the shot I'm after without needing to do that, fortunately. I'm getting way too old to be contorting myself on the ground to get certain angles, too, and while I'm still somewhat flexible, I'm absolutely nowhere near as much so as I was some years ago. Getting back up off the ground is not as easy as it used to be, even though I can still do it!

For me the EVF was one of the major reasons I found mirrorless cameras appealing. Ever since my first exposure to one -- the NEX 7 -- some years ago I found it preferable to an optical VF, even though at that time EVFs were still just coming into their own. Since then, some major improvements! Even at that it took me a few years to actually get to the point of making the complete switch from DSLR to mirrorless full-frame.

Mirrorless photography has other advantages beyond the EVF, of course: smaller, lighter-weight camera bodies without the bulk of many DSLRs, the ability to shoot silently when needed in particular situations so no more clack-clack-clack of a shutter, etc., etc.

The saying used to be, "once you go Mac, you'll never go back," and I think that for many photographers the saying now could easily be, "once you go mirrorless, you'll never go back," too......

 

[Fravin]

Thank you. I picked the 23mm f2 for two reasons, the size/weight and weather resistance. It's also optically corrected. I like hiking and taking walks in the city in the rain/snow, so WR is important to me unless I'm using rain covers (which is annoying). And the size/weight makes it nice to carry around all the time. The 23 f1.4 is larger/heavier, not WR and slow/loud AF. There's a new version coming next year as it seems. The 35mm f1.4 will be replaced with a 33mm f1.4 WR.

I have the 16-55 f2.8 on my list, as well as the 50-140 f2.8 WR (that covers my FF equivalent 24-70/70-200 needs) and the 100-400. Those will be next, probably in that order. Not sure what to do in the 50mm range. 56mm f1.2 is not WR and slow/loud AF, the 50mm f1.0 is too heavy/large. I also want something wider than 23mm, so maybe 8-16 or 10-24 (both not perfect, one too heavy, the other not WR) or a prime. Will have to wait and see what next year brings and then decide. Will likely get the 16-55 and 50-140 later this year.

I have them all, except the 23mm f2.

In fact the first gen lenses uses a louder AF engine, but I don't care. Their optics are so advanced... The 35mm f1.4 looks magical. I love them.

I'm a nature photographer too, you can look at www.fravin.net or instagram.com/fravin

I love the 50-140 for portrait use, but not for nature, I would prefer the 100-400 or the 70-300 for birds or telephoto landscaping.

The 10-24 is now WR!!!

 

[macsound1]

Maybe it's just me but using an EVF on a Sony 6500 and A7ii is the worst. The pixels are so big and the brightness changes way too much as you move your eye. I take lots of photos of movement like marching bands and parades etc. so I'm always moving around.
Personally I've relugated those two cameras for video only and use my 80D for photos.

 

[Fravin]

Mirrorless photography has other advantages beyond the EVF, of course: smaller, lighter-weight camera bodies without the bulk of many DSLRs, the ability to shoot silently when needed in particular situations so no more clack-clack-clack of a shutter, etc., etc.

That was cool!

I realy did the switch because Fujifilm was offering a superb IQ with its sensor. And fujifilm's lens were optically advanced over Canon L offerings. I still think they are great lenses. The Canon's ones look dull compared to fuji's.

 

[bsamcash]

Sony a7II here. I almost exclusively use the EVF. The only times I don't are for overhead angles or video recording, both of which are rare.

 

[Steven-iphone]

Yes, Fujifilm x100t - EVF over Optical viewfinder
Rarely use the back panel, mostly to adjust camera settings like ND filter, focus area selection, profile setup

 

[mackmgg]

What you say makes sense for the cameras you mention (they don't have joysticks). I'm curious though, have you tried AF point adjustment with a stick vs touch? If so, still the same opinion?

I've got an R6, which has both a touchscreen and a joystick. If I'm shooting through the viewfinder I'll use the joystick (or just focus and recompose, since the AF tracking is so darn good) and if I'm using the screen I'll just tap to focus. Tap to focus is definitely way faster and easier than a joystick, but not enough so that I'll fold out the screen just for it. There's also the option to use the screen as a trackpad when using the EVF, which is still way nicer than the joystick, but I would accidentally hit it with my cheek often enough that I disabled it and just use the joystick.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

I am still using my Canon 6D MKII DSLR camera and with Live View I get to see all of my exposure settings before I shoot in real time, however I still use my viewfinder for composition in almost all situations. I'm not sure if it's just because that's how I started out or what but it's always worked best for me, I then switch it over to Live View to tweak my other settings. Works great on a tripod but switching back and forth is too unwieldy for handheld.

It seems like Mirrorless would save me that extra step since you can see it all in the viewfinder but I thought I would throw this question out there.

Sometimes I use screen for LiveView on my 7D, but not on the 5DII. I have gotten used to the viewfinder so much that even when shooting with my R6 I still look though the viewfinder. On bright daylight sometimes it is difficult to use the screen, too. Now, on both the R5 and R6 you have full control of the camera's operation regardless if you are viewing through the viewfinder or the screen, but while viewing through the viewfinder you still have to operate (manually push, or move) the dials or buttons. Not so if you are using the back screen. In this case all the camera operations, including shutter release, can be done by toughing the screen.

For example, my R6 is setup this way: if I move my face away from the rubber piece of the viewfinder, the viewfinder turns off and the back screen immediately turns on. In this case if I want to move focus points (for example), and then take the photo, I drag the focus point (s) with my fingertip, and then tap the screen and the camera releases the shutter. Yes, in the darkness of night I can orient the camera properly when looking though the viewfinder, but it is much easier when looking at the large screen in the back of the camera.

When taking photos of the Auroras I start composing through the viewfinder, then look at the screen to make sure that the camera is properly orientated (parallel to the horizon). This can be done quite rapidly since the soonest I move my face away from the camera the screen turns on. From that moment on I can press either the shutter release, or just tap the screen to take the photo.

One thing that I appreciate about Canon cameras is how easy it is to navigate through the camera menus. Once you learn one, you will understand the newer model.

 

[Fravin]

One thing that I appreciate about Canon cameras is how easy it is to navigate through the camera menus. Once you learn one, you will understand the newer model.

That's true!