Most of the time I see the photograph before I even lift the camera. (Too often
I see the photograph and have no camera to lift. <g>) Then the viewfinder
becomes a framing device, as you note. Very infrequently do I use the
viewfinder for the actual recognition and composition. I suppose the type of
viewfinder wouldn't matter to me so much, all things considered. That said, I'm
currently using a nice Nikon with a 100-percent view, fully optical viewfinder
that is exceptionally nice. <g> But then again I also use my itty-bitty Canon
G-12, using the LCD on the back for framing, and that works, too.
--Bob
On Aug 26, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
> I personally believe that the viewfinder experience is extremely important
> to those of us who do iterative composing. There are people who
> previsualize and are able to just use the viewfinder for framing. I'm not
> one of those. I compose on the viewfinder itself. That's why the OM system
> remains so important to me.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|