ilkka_nissila
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.14 #16 · Hogan's article - The DSLR cash cow is alive for how long? | |
Steve Spencer wrote:
I just don't think that when they make that choice they should pretend that they aren't giving up something, because they are which is the flexibility with which images can be viewed using that type of focussing.
I see it as best of both worlds as one has available the optical viewfinder for a more direct and real-time contact with the subject, with no nausea-inducing delays, and fast focusing for action subjects (though Multi-CAM 20k is better than the D780's 3500 series module) - and the other is the LCD which allows the benefits of easier shooting from high and low angles, and on tripod, magnified manual focusing. I don't want the EVF as it magnifies the phenomena that I really don't want to see: delayed image, pixels, jaggies, flickering (though Nikon have managed to avoid this for a good part in the Z6/Z7 EVF) and I find them distracting from watching the subject's expressions and emotions, which is the main thing I usually am interested in when photographing people. For me the LCD is a convenient tool (for precision work on tripod and unusual angles) but the OVF is the main way I use a camera for living subjects. If one wants to do video hand-held, or manual focus hand-held then the EVF may be a great tool for that, but to me the price to pay for it (loss of the optical viewfinder) is (to me) too high. I would like to have a small camera like Z6 + 24-70/4 to put on my travel tripod for a light walkaround kit for non-moving subjects. But the EVF always puts me off such thoughts, not to mention the cost of all the new lenses.
In the old days, before tiltable live view, people had medium format cameras with waist-level viewfinders (very popular in portrait and fashion photography), but the crowd shots where one lifts the camera above the crowd's heads may have had to be shot blind (i.e. one guesstimates the composition - even so, I still took such shots). People could kneel down for a low angle but that's not very convenient, comfortable or clean way to get the camera on the ground and often I want to lower the camera just a bit, something like 30-40cm, and shooting from that height requires partial kneeling down and to be honest I don't see it as an ergonomic working position. And yes, with CDAF LV it is a pain to use the LV for living subjects (with non-CDAF-optimal focus motors). But most DSLR shooters use Canon and they've had dual-pixel AF for a while now. Having the option of a competent LV focuser among Nikon DSLRs is definitely a relief. Will I buy it? It really depends on what else Nikon put on the market.
A MF focusing screen isn't much bigger than the back LCD. If you go look at many older generation portraits, rather famous ones as well, many of them were shot at a lowered position compared to the photographer's eye level. And I believe people chose this type of a viewfinder because they wanted this height rather than the one provided by the eye-level viewfinder. (Cost may have been a factor as well).
Of course, kneeling down, or lifting oneself on a stool are always possibilities, if you prefer that. There are certainly different ways of shooting and no one way that is best. How the D780 LV works for portrait photography at waist level depends also on how much delay there is, if EFCS is used (another benefit of the D780), will it just initiate the exposure without delay or is there a longer delay than in viewfinder shooting? Theoretically it can be shorter with EFCS than with the mechanical shutter, but it depends on the way it has been implemented.
Switching between LV and OVF, I don't have any orientation problems, I use each for their benefits; the LV to see how the shot will be rendered by the camera and the OVF how the subject looks through the lens without the digital processing applied to the LV shot. DSLRs allow one both options whereas mirrorless cameras (with the exception of some Fuji models) only offer the computer rendering of the image, a moment afterwards.
Anyway, different people have different subjects, shooting preferences and so on. What is nice today is that there is great diversity in camera equipment and everyone pretty much can choose based on their preferences, budget permitting.
|
).