GM1 Review-- What's wrong with bifocals?

[stevejac]

I also have a GM1 as backup for an Olympus EM-1. I quite like the GM1, but that's not what I'm commenting upon. I wonder, instead, about the reviewer's aversion to using bifocals. I've been using them for years and simply don't do anything without them. I've got the hidden bifocals, both standard and in sunglasses (the latter without polarization that will make some lcd's invisible).

The hidden ones avoid any challenges to vanity as well as being much more usable. Perhaps the reviewer has the hidden ones, and they aren't properly aligned with his eyes? If they are, I've found them to be perfectly functional.

[PhotoEcosse]

I didn't know they still made bi-focals.

I have been wearing vari-focals for many decades and have not found them to be any handicap at all for photography, whether using waist-level viewfinders, optical eye-level viewfinders or even EVFs.

One misconception that I frequently encounter in discussions about taking photographs while wearing specs (not directly related to this thread) is that an amazing number of folk seem to have forgotten what we all knew when SLR film cameras were first introduced - i.e. that the viewfinder shows a two-dimensional image on a ground glass screen (or its modern equivalent). So, if the viewfinder dioptre adjustment is correct (in my case, to suit the "distance" area of my vari-focal lenses) then, if the viewfinder image looks sharp, so will the photograph. Incredible how many people think that, when using a reflex viewfinder, your eye is actually focussing on the subject via the viewfinder and the camera lens.

[michael]

Firstly, varifocals make me nauseous. I've tried them several times. Not for me.

Secondly, I don't like shooting with glasses on, bifocals or not. When it's windy they make my eyes tear, and when it's sunny I wear sunglasses. With sunglasses I can't properly see a rear LCD for composition. Without them I can't properly see a rear LCD for composition.

Did I mention that I hate rear lcds for composition? Phooey.

Michael

[David S]

I need glasses for reading and hence to see the screen. With a viewfinder I don't need to wear my reading glasses outside. Biggest risk for me is acute dizziness when walking and wearing the reading glasses leading to being on the ground in seconds!

So viewfinder or not my camera.

Dave S

[Telecaster]

For me varifocal (aka graduated) eyeglasses have been a huge plus since I need different correction for reading, monitor viewing and distance. I've been using 'em for a decade now...after a brief adjustment period I forgot all about the graduated aspect. In fact this is probably the first time I've thought about it in years.   

I love using LCD screens as waist-level finders, especially when tripod mounted. This lets me reduce tripod height in many situations too, often a good thing.

-Dave-

[Rob C]

For me varifocal (aka graduated) eyeglasses have been a huge plus since I need different correction for reading, monitor viewing and distance. I've been using 'em for a decade now...after a brief adjustment period I forgot all about the graduated aspect. In fact this is probably the first time I've thought about it in years.   

I love using LCD screens as waist-level finders, especially when tripod mounted. This lets me reduce tripod height in many situations too, often a good thing.

-Dave-

That flipping screen is something the new Fuji X-T1 has that could prove a great attraction along with auto-focus; I often think I'd love to shoot something really at ground level, but will simply not get down and dirty when there's no commercial imperative to drive me to it. (Anyway, vanity aside, I sort of wonder if I could even get back up again from down there, without falling on my ass first.)

Rob C

[ripgriffith]

Firstly, varifocals make me nauseous. I've tried them several times. Not for me.

Secondly, I don't like shooting with glasses on, bifocals or not. When it's windy they make my eyes tear, and when it's sunny I wear sunglasses. With sunglasses I can't properly see a rear LCD for composition. Without them I can't properly see a rear LCD for composition.

Did I mention that I hate rear lcds for composition? Phooey.

Michael

I am blesses (cursed) with extreme myopia, nicely correctable with glasses, but without glasses, I can focus on the  rear LCD of any of my cameras, Sony a65, panny GF1 or G2, at a distance of only a few centimeters, close enough to allow elbows into the chest.  Granted, I prefer the EVF of the Sony or the G2, but the GF1 works fine for me.

[allegretto]

Firstly, varifocals make me nauseous. I've tried them several times. Not for me.

Secondly, I don't like shooting with glasses on, bifocals or not. When it's windy they make my eyes tear, and when it's sunny I wear sunglasses. With sunglasses I can't properly see a rear LCD for composition. Without them I can't properly see a rear LCD for composition.

Did I mention that I hate rear lcds for composition? Phooey.

Michael

This is a very important point for some of us. At this point in life it is difficult to see the LCD screen well enough for composition detail without readers. However, with proper dioptric correction, the image in the rangefinder or ground glass or EVF can be quite clear.

Additionally I think it was you who pointed out that the hold was something like holding a baby with a dirty diaper when viewing an LCD and not terribly stable.

[jjj]

I am blesses (cursed) with extreme myopia, nicely correctable with glasses, but without glasses, I can focus on the  rear LCD of any of my cameras, Sony a65, panny GF1 or G2, at a distance of only a few centimeters, close enough to allow elbows into the chest.  Granted, I prefer the EVF of the Sony or the G2, but the GF1 works fine for me.

That's like having a really big viewfinder I guess. 

[eronald]

I like Michael's article on the GM1 because it is a user-review, not a preview, and shows the limitations in field-use of this object.  But I hope to test the next version of this camera myself - I don't believe that one size needs to fit all.

Edmund

[Lightsmith]

Part of the problem with bifocals and similar eyeglasses is that the optician is formulating the lenses for people using them for reading or for driving and not for use with a computer screen 30 inches away or for use looking through a viewfinder or checking a LCD display. If provided with guidance as to how you use the eyeglasses they can adjust them for a specific use.

I have general pairs in both regular and tinted (no polarized as that causes problems with the LCD display and when using polarizing filters), and one for computer use that is dialed in for my typical distance from the monitor.

Thank god and Leitz for autofocus cameras which greatly reduces my dependence on eyeglasses. Peculiar that Leitz developed the technology but refused to implement it with their Leica RF cameras.

[allegretto]

If you don't need distance specs just go to the store with your camera and find ones that allow the viewfinder image to be crisp.

Higher numbers make things appear slightly larger but only because it forces you to hold things closer. Most wear drugstore readers far more powerful than they need and further weaken their reading abilities. One pair will probably allow computer screens and the viewfinder, but chef yourself to be sure. there are some person to person variation.

[PeterAit]

Firstly, varifocals make me nauseous. I've tried them several times. Not for me.

Secondly, I don't like shooting with glasses on, bifocals or not. When it's windy they make my eyes tear, and when it's sunny I wear sunglasses. With sunglasses I can't properly see a rear LCD for composition. Without them I can't properly see a rear LCD for composition.

Did I mention that I hate rear lcds for composition? Phooey.

Michael

Bifocals? Try tri-focals like I have. I have never found my glasses to be an impediment to photography (all with eye-level viewfinders), although I surely would like my 20 year-old eyesight back!

[mediumcool]

How about this? I thought the GM1 may be a great carry-everywhere camera, but the lack of viewfinder options was extremely off-putting. While I occasionally use the flip-out LCD on my Panasonic G3 for high or low shots, the electronic viewfinder is my viewer of choice.

[BobDavid]

"Phooey" is a great word. I'd forgotten it. Now I have a new word to play, if my Scrabble tiles line up just right.

[jjj]

Bifocals? Try tri-focals like I have. I have never found my glasses to be an impediment to photography (all with eye-level viewfinders), although I surely would like my 20 year-old eyesight back!

I thought people wore varifocals these days?
Though I did see an article on glasses you could focus a while back.

[Rhossydd]

I wonder, instead, about the reviewer's aversion to using bifocals.

I suspect that the problem here is that Michael doesn't need bifocals, but just needs glasses for very close work(readers). A single prescription for close vision.
That's actually a very important distinction that most people who do need proper bifocals realise.

I fit into the single prescription category and trying to work round it with half moon style glasses really just isn't an option. Trust me on this, I've spent nearly 15 years working with TV viewfinders for which I need glasses, but my normal vision is perfect from 5ft, so to see the ground clearly the glasses have to come off.

Michael's comments on viewfinders in the review are pretty much bang on for me, although I also loath eye level electronic viewfinders on still cameras too. They're just nowhere near good enough yet.

[jjj]

A potential bifocal solution for what you suggest Rhossydd, is to have correction for close work and the second/top lens be neutral rather than corrective.

[Rhossydd]

A potential bifocal solution for what you suggest Rhossydd, is to have correction for close work and the second/top lens be neutral rather than corrective.

That's just no good. Every time you look down to see where you're walking the close up part of the lens makes everything out of focus. Until you've experienced this problem you can't really understand it.

Best solution: Proper optical viewfinders with dioptre adjustment. It's nothing new.

[jjj]

I guessed that could be an issue, but suggestion was more for being able to see camera controls and distance.
Would laser surgery help your eyes? I've known some folks try it and it made a big difference to them, as their issue was not having to wear glasses whilst doing martial arts or partner dancing.