View Poll Results: Do you need a 100% viewfinder coverage?

Voters
33. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    15 45.45%
  • No

    18 54.55%
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Do you need a 100% viewfinder?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default Do you need a 100% viewfinder?

    SLR users, do you really think you need a 100% coverage in your viewfinder? Or are the 90-95% coverage provided by most modern SLRs sufficient? Give your views here.

    Regards
    CK

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default Re: Do you need a 100% viewfinder?

    Originally posted by ckiang
    Give your views here.
    Wah, very very corny.

  3. #3
    Mouse
    Guests

    Default

    No, I don't believe you need 100% viewfinder. At least 92% is needed. Reason being the lab will normal crop your photo by that much. To be really safe, 94% is good enough.

    If 100% viewfinder is what you are paying that extra buck, then don't waste your money. Unless you are performing the developing yourself in your darkroom.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    About the only way you can print the full 100% even in the darkroom is if you print with the edges of the neg included.

    Remember also that normal printing sizes aren't always even in 35mm dimensions.

    Slide masks mask the frame.

    But with digital, that changes... a 100% viewfinder becomes very useful with digital SLRs because you really do get the full frame with d-slrs.

  5. #5
    Mouse
    Guests

    Default

    Jed, you're right. I am only talking about film SLR. Me no experience yet with digital cameras....you know...old as dinosaurs cannot keep up...

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default Re: Re: Do you need a 100% viewfinder?

    Originally posted by Jed


    Wah, very very corny.
    Pun intended.

    Regards
    CK

  7. #7
    ClubSNAP Idol Adam Goi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    5,682

    Default

    It'll be a plus to have lor

  8. #8

    Default

    I WANT it...not sure if I NEED it...
    DR KOH KHO KING

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Wow, this is interesting. About as many people think they need 100% viewfinders as those who don't. Maybe those who voted "Yes" and share why they think so. Especially if they are shooting film (digital is another story).

    Regards
    CK

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    There are a few reasons why I would prefer a 100% viewfinder , if not for the SIZE and PRICE of a pro SLR.

    1) When using bellow style lens hood that can ZOOM in or out to accomodate different focal length, you can see if there are any vignet at the edge of your slide.

    2) If you use pro slide mounts, the full frame of your slide will be shown on the wall. Therefore, a 100% viewfinder will prevent you from guessing what might or might not be appearing on the area not shown by a 90% viewfinder.

    3) If all the camera makers are producing 100% viewfinder for composition, including P&S, then I won't see why the print makers still insist on giving us a "NOT SO NORMAL" normal print size. We may after all, get a true 35mm full frame printed at consumer price, instead of wasting the valuable area on the edge of it.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Originally posted by jasonpgc
    2) If you use pro slide mounts, the full frame of your slide will be shown on the wall. Therefore, a 100% viewfinder will prevent you from guessing what might or might not be appearing on the area not shown by a 90% viewfinder.
    Hmm... serious question here. What brand are you using? I'm using Gepe ones and they're not 100%.

    3) If all the camera makers are producing 100% viewfinder for composition, including P&S, then I won't see why the print makers still insist on giving us a "NOT SO NORMAL" normal print size. We may after all, get a true 35mm full frame printed at consumer price, instead of wasting the valuable area on the edge of it.
    The different print sizes are a legacy. To be honest with digital we should move to the A scale of working, since there is a common, easy ratio between A0, A1, A2 through to A6. The problem with printing 100% is that it's very difficult to get really 100%, your registration will need to be perfect with each frame. That's why I doubt we will see lots of 100% slide mounts or printing 100%. Even in the darkroom working with your negs by hand it's very difficult to get a full frame print without having some of the outside border show in the print.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    Jed, just to be fair, I took a physical measurement of the slide mount pocket. It is 23 * 35 mm.

    This actually covers 95.8% vertical and 97.2% horizontal of a full 35mm frame area. Not really a huge difference to my eyes, but I don't deny the fact that it is my mistake to assume 100%.

    Jed, the above dimension is measured from the Kaiser Slide mount w/o glass.
    Last edited by jasonpgc; 11th March 2002 at 12:54 AM.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Ok,

    By your numbers that's about 96-97% overall, which is what is found on the semi-pro cameras like the EOS3 and F100.

    The point is 1mm is a lot when you magnify the original. With 100% viewfinders you find yourself having to compensate down, as in to make leeway for the stuff that will get cropped... so it's a reverse situation.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    Jed, 96-97% is excellent. but not the 90% vertical & 92% horizontal found on the Elan series.

    "With 100% viewfinders you find yourself having to compensate down, as in to make leeway for the stuff that will get cropped"
    Yes, I agree, looks like too much isn't always better

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •