Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Viewing LCD in bright light

Reply
Thread Tools

Viewing LCD in bright light

 
 
ray
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-22-2007
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 02:11:06 +0000, Jan Nademlejnsky wrote:

> It is too late for you now, but never buy a camera without an optical
> viewfinder, which is becoming more and more difficult these days. It is mere
> expensive to produce camera with mechanically driven optical viewfinder than
> without it.
>
> Jan
>


B.S. - I currently own a Kodak P850 with Electronic ViewFinder and find it
quite suitable for bright days. Was out shooting yesterday while
showshoeing in bright sunlight. What you need is a viewfinder - but it
need not be an optical one.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Paul Allen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-22-2007
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 02:11:06 GMT
"Jan Nademlejnsky" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> It is too late for you now, but never buy a camera without an optical
> viewfinder, which is becoming more and more difficult these days. It
> is mere expensive to produce camera with mechanically driven optical
> viewfinder than without it.


An optical viewfinder is surely more expensive, especially if the
taking lens is a zoom. But why would you prefer such an impractical
contraption over an EVF that shows exactly the same field of view the
sensor sees with no mechanical complexities?

It seems that what is needed is a *viewfinder*, of whatever type, that
permits you to brace elbows against chest and camera against forehead.

To the original poster, there are cameras that sense ambient light and
adjust the LCD brightness. My FZ30 does that and is fairly useful in
sunlight. But, I don't use the LCD for framing unless the camera is
on a tripod.

Paul Allen
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Peter in New Zealand
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2007

"Steve B" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:fkjce1$13h9$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Arozz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Previous threads and postings have bemoaned the problems of viewing an
> > LCD in bright light which is particularly a problem when there is no
> > viewfinder on the camera. Our current camera lacks a viewfinder. Does
> > anyone know of any work-arounds? I have tried putting a dark cloth
> > over my head and the camera. It looks like oldtime photography and
> > gets strange stares but it works but it is a nuisance. For instance,
> > does anyone market a viewfinder which could be attached to the top of
> > the camera?
> >

>
> See if you can find one of those pyramid shape slide viewers that are used
> by holding up to the light. Placed over the LCD of any digital camera,

held
> on by an elastic band, you'll get perfect vision in bright light.
>

Now THAT has just got to be one of the most elegant and effective answers to
a frequent problem that I have seen for a long time. I rooted around in some
old drawers until I unearthed my old "up-to-the-eye" slide viewer, popped it
onto my little Fuji 340 with a couple of bits of tape, and whammo! Perfect
solution to something that has irritated me for years. Why on earth can't I
be brilliant like that? Anyway, thanks for the suggestion - that idea ought
to be on every photography notice board.
--
Peter in New Zealand. (Email address is fake)
Collector of old cameras, tropical fish fancier, good coffee nutter, and
compulsive computer fiddler.


 
Reply With Quote
 
QUAKEnSHAKE
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2007
Polarized glasses/sunglasses.

I bought my Canon sd800is cause of the optical VF, I have yet to use
it after nearly a year.
Most of its use is outdoors too, many times out fishing. I nearly always
set-up the catch shot with the sun behind me. The polarization of my
glasses takes the sun glare on the screen away. In my case, if I could I
would trade the ovf for a larger screen.

Ray

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2007
David J Taylor wrote:
> Ron Hunter wrote:
> []
>> It does, indeed, but some of us just won't buy a camera without
>> one.... My wife, on the other hand, refused to use the optical
>> viewfinder. Takes all types. BTW, guess who gets blurry pictures...

>
> You do!
>
> <G>
>
> I'm used to TTL viewfinders now, and prefer even a lower resolution EVF to
> an optical finder (which I find have too small an image). Yes, a 230K or
> even 900K pixel EVF is better, and the view through a decent DSLR is great
> (although I've found some DSLRs rather dark).
>
> David
>
>

Wrong. I don't get the blurry pictures. She does, because there is no
IS on the camera, and holding it at arms length doesn't provide a stable
platform for taking a picture, except in bright sunlight. Then there is
the fact that she 'stabs' the shutter button like spearing an olive,
rather than squeezing it.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2007
David J Taylor wrote:
> Ron Hunter wrote:
> []
>> It does, indeed, but some of us just won't buy a camera without
>> one.... My wife, on the other hand, refused to use the optical
>> viewfinder. Takes all types. BTW, guess who gets blurry pictures...

>
> I should also have added - my wife has just been away for a week's trip,
> and took my / our / now her? Panasonic TZ3, with just the LCD finder.
> She's normally used to an EVF (Panasonic FZ20) but spoke very highly of
> the TZ3 during the week. It will be interesting to see what the images
> are like when viewed on our normal 1600 x 1200 displays, and to hear how
> the LCD alone compared to the EVF/LCD combination of the FZ20 in
> operation. The TZ3 does have some features to enhance visibility in
> bright light, but in Central Sweden at this time of year the sun isn't
> that bright, but it /is/ quite low on the horizon which could cause other
> problems! From what she said, we may have to get a second TZ3 to have one
> each!
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
>

I have never seen an EVF I thought was acceptable. Doesn't mean there
aren't any out there, just that I don't even LOOK at a camera unless it
has an optical viewfinder. To me, that is a minimum requirement.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2007
Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <4cfe629c-3f4e-4e15-94c1-
> http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)>, Arozz says...
>> Previous threads and postings have bemoaned the problems of viewing an
>> LCD in bright light which is particularly a problem when there is no
>> viewfinder on the camera. Our current camera lacks a viewfinder. Does
>> anyone know of any work-arounds? I have tried putting a dark cloth
>> over my head and the camera. It looks like oldtime photography and
>> gets strange stares but it works but it is a nuisance. For instance,
>> does anyone market a viewfinder which could be attached to the top of
>> the camera?

>
> You'll find out that in practice that LCD viewfinder is usable in bright
> daylight. Colours might not be well visible if the sun directly shines
> on the viewfinder, but you should be able to correctly frame.

Neither mine, or my wife's camera will display a usable image on the LCD
if the sun shines directly on it. But then we are in Texas, and the sun
is quite vicious in these latitudes.
 
Reply With Quote
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2007
Ron Hunter wrote:
[]
> I have never seen an EVF I thought was acceptable. Doesn't mean there
> aren't any out there, just that I don't even LOOK at a camera unless
> it has an optical viewfinder. To me, that is a minimum requirement.


Well, at least you and I will not be competing to buy the same camera!

I would certainly accept that to someone used to an optical finder,
particularly that in and SLR, an EVF can come as a bit of a shock, but
considered purely as a "framing aid" rather than a "viewfinder", to me the
majority are acceptable. The Minolta A2, with its VGA resolution EVF, was
much more than acceptable.

Cheers,
David


 
Reply With Quote
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2007
Ron Hunter wrote:
[]
> Wrong. I don't get the blurry pictures. She does, because there is
> no IS on the camera, and holding it at arms length doesn't provide a
> stable platform for taking a picture, except in bright sunlight. Then
> there is the fact that she 'stabs' the shutter button like
> spearing an olive, rather than squeezing it.


Well, I guess that would be the answer, but as you say, technique also
matters and jabbing is not good.

Like you, I find that you get a firmer base when the camera is pressed to
the head, but if you think about the arm's length position, the majority
of the jitter should be in the up-and-down position of the camera, rather
than its pointing direction, so at least for distant shots that position
may not be quite as bad as is made out.

But different folk will have physical make-up and therefore different
requirements.....

Cheers,
David


 
Reply With Quote
 
Alfred Molon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2007
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Ron Hunter
says...

> Wrong. I don't get the blurry pictures. She does, because there is no
> IS on the camera, and holding it at arms length doesn't provide a stable
> platform for taking a picture, except in bright sunlight. Then there is
> the fact that she 'stabs' the shutter button like spearing an olive,
> rather than squeezing it.


Here I have to contradict you. With the camera at arms length I get
sharp images down to 1/13s - 1/20s, depending on the size of the camera
(1/13s with a lightweight Olympus 5050, 1/20s with a heavier Sony R1).

This is because on the one hand the arms work as a shock absorber and on
the other hand it is easier to "freeze" a light object in mid-air than a
heavier object, for which your muscles have to apply more force. Also,
don't forget that P&S cameras don't have a swinging mirror which causes
vibrations.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cannon Power Shot S3i - unuseable LCD in bright light? BillL Digital Photography 6 07-07-2006 05:43 PM
security light, kinda bright after all! Spike Computer Security 0 06-24-2006 05:34 AM
Canon S2 viewfinder in bright light edward101@gmail.com Digital Photography 6 02-18-2006 06:59 AM
Bright Light on one side Don Dunlap Digital Photography 17 12-03-2004 01:50 AM
Coping with bright sunlight on the viewing screen Phil Digital Photography 14 08-29-2003 09:07 PM



Advertisments