Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: BobMcCarthy on May 24, 2005, 03:25:41 pm
-
Not any more than you can sue manufactures of cheap shoes because they hurt your feet.
-
One thing to bear in mind is that even if you do change from the 10D to a camera with a larger image in the view finder, you have probably picked up some bad habits with respect to screwing up your eyes to see into the smaller viewfinder - which you may carry over to any new camera. Even before changing over cameras it might be worth discussing with your optomoterist any specific exercises are techniques you can employ to reduce the stress that you are putting on your eyes. Whilst it can be a little bit more difficult to operate the camera you may want to practice using the camera keeping both eyes open (if necessary put a patch over the left eye if the incident light is a problem). You may also consider obtaining a larger eye cup for the viewfinder to help block out light entering the viewfinder between your eye and the rear of the camera - from experience it is the need to block out this incident light that cases me to screw up my eye and press it as close to the viewfinder as possible which could be leading to the strain you are experiencing.
-
Might this be the solution to Pom's eye problems: a digital camera with live video feed to a laptop screen?
I think his solution is wearing his glasses....
(Pom - get a set of progressive bifocals or half-frame reading glasses. Stick a cleaning cloth in your shirt pocket. Then try to accept aging gracefully as some of the rest of us are attempting to do.)
:cool:
-
I developed an eye condition in my right eye about two month ago. The optician originally diagnosed it as a specific medical problem but after another check today is confused. He doesn't think that it is that eye condition though there is a distortion in the right eyeball. He asked me if I'm squinting too much into the viewfinder while tightly screwing up my left eye. I replied in the neagative, i.e. that I'm not doing anything I haven't always done.
I got home and it struck me that I've been using the 10D exclusively for the past 7-8 months with it's tiny viewfinder. When shooting events/weddings with about 20-30 hours a week spent trying to use that mini viewfinder for cropping, composition and looking for trees coming out of peoples heads, that could have brought on a distortion of the eye.
I took a FF film camera and the 10D back to him and told him to try focusing through them, after ten seconds he said that the viewfinder could well be the cause. I'm going to see a specialist next week and I think that it will be interesting to see if he does diagnose the viewfinder as the problem.
If it is the problem then it's either film or a 1Ds. I've give or take burnt my film bridges so I wonder what it will be..
-
Why are the viewfinders smaller?
Isn't it just an issue of magnifying the view?
(If they can't be enlarged then perhaps this will put a bit more pressure on releasing high quality EVFs.)
-
Oh that the 1.6 crop DSLR's were cheap.... :)
-
One way or another, I think the solution will involve brighter lenses, in the sense of larger maximum aperture diameter, so as to deliver more total light to the viewfinder. (Aperture diameter determines this at a given FOV, independent of format.)
Two things typically change with smaller format DSLR viewfinders, so could you ask the optician which he thinks might cause the problem:
1) the image is smaller
2) the image is less bright with a given lens
The second is because the VF magnification is usually increased to reduce the first effect.
If (1) is a problem, increasing VF magnification could help; upgrade to a 20D, or get a clip-on VF magnifier or such. However, this makes the VF image dimmer, so changing to brighter lenses might be desirable.
If (2) is a problem, brighter lenses are clearly a solution.
the solution of changing to a larger format while still using lenses of the same minimum f-stop is also using brighter lenses in the sense of larger aperture diameters.
This need for bright lenses does not surprise me: the greater sensitivity of DSLR sensors allows one to get away with smaller, lighter lenses of smaller maximum aperture diameters, but our eyes are not getting any more sensitive are they? I have already sworn off using f/5.6 lenses in sub-35mm formats, except if it is all I can afford for long telephoto reach.
-
Oh that the 1.6 crop DSLR's were cheap....
Well actually we are buying cheap camera's. I look at it as
We are buying N80's or Rebels which are $200-300 cameras with $500 plus of digital processing equipment added on. = D70/Drebel
or we are buying $2000/$2500 f-6/EOS 1v with $3000 to $6000 of digital assessories.
EOS 1D/1Ds / D2x
That said, I do agree the range of prices with digital hardly overlaps the film range. One can buy the best of the best in film for 1/3 to 1/2 of the going price of equivalent DSLR's.
Doesn't seem entirely proportional but R&D has to be high for the manufacture in the race to finish at the top of the heap.
-
meadow full of yellow flowers as me.
That looks like my front yard! Except the flowers in my yard are dandelions. I've actually heard of several people doing the same black cloth trick.
-
I'm thinking that you might want to check the apparent viewing distance of the focusing screen in the cameras. Image size is one factor, but so is the eye to focus screen optical distance. My film cameras (Olympus OM) have a viewfinder which resembles an IMAX theatre and the focus distance is about five or six feet. My E-1 has a smaller cropped viewfinder image but optically it remains about the same distance.
Another option, which isn't all that insane is to go to a medium format digital with waist-level viewfinder. For the bulk of my industrial photography I use a prosumer with live EVF/LCD monitor. It's a real pleasure to use both eyes.
Ken
-
Wow! I've been using a 10D for a little over a year now, and my right eye has changed more than my left (just got new glasses).
Maybe you've given me an excuse to upgrade to a 1DsII ::
Eric
-
I was under the impression it was the reduced format size with smaller mirrors, prisms, etc. When I compared my D2x with the D70, I realized it was all about cost savings.
Huge difference between the two (D2x vs.D70). D2x is almost as good as my F5.
-
For several different reasons, I purchased an Angle Viewer C for my 10D. It not only makes some macro shots much more comfortable, but it seems to have increase my focusing accuracy.
It has a 1.25 and 2.5 magnifier, the ability to be used at any angle in the plane of focus, an a diopter focus capability.
So, the focus image is larger, not quite as bright, easy to see and has eliminated both the squinting and mess on the histogram.
Alan
-
I do wear glasses and took off the rubber eyecup on the 10D as it was shmearing up my glasses what with pressing against it so hard.
I tried playing with my elan II compared to my 10D. With the FF viewfinder my eye was relaxed and comfortable, including shooting with both eyes open. With the 10D my left eye screwed up tight and my right eye tried to pop out of it's socket when I looked through the viewfinder. The difference was both very noticeable and remarkable as far as I could see when tested side by side.
The idea of faster glass makes sense, if I buy a 1Ds next week it will be with a 24-70L f2.8 to replace my 17-40L f4 which has been masquerading as a 'normal zoom' lens on the 10D.
Anyway, we will see what we shall see....
(no I didn't intend it as a pun, I have my standards!)
-
A few years ago I was shooting a pano up by Clear Lake, and a gentleman stopped his car about 20 yards behind mine and started shooting the same meadow full of yellow flowers as me.
(http://galleries.visual-vacations.com/images/ClearLakeField.jpg)
When I finished shooting my series, I looked over and saw the other gentleman had set up his camera on a tripod, and was fiddling with it under a black cloth. At first I thought he had a 4x5 or the like, but it turned out he had one of the floppy-disk Sony Mavicas and was simply using the black cloth to block out enough ambient light so he could see the LCD!
-
Too bad he didn't know about the add on LCD hoods such as the Extend-A-View. They turn the LCD into a eyepiece viewer - complete with magnifying lens.
I had one for my first digital (Oly C2020) and it worked great. Gave me very usable TTL viewing in bright sunlight. Attached (when desired) with Velcro.
-
Heh. If you're dodgy, you can trick people into thinking you're shooting a view camera...
-
I think his solution is wearing his glasses....
(Pom - get a set of progressive bifocals or half-frame reading glasses. Stick a cleaning cloth in your shirt pocket. Then try to accept aging gracefully as some of the rest of us are attempting to do.)
Um, I wear glasses all my waking hours, my prescription is -2.75,
Oh, and I'm only 25 years old....
I shoot event/wedding photography and am thank G-d very busy, a wedding usually means about 8-12 hours of constant shooting.
I was shooting a big barbeque a couple of nights back on a commercial job for a charity. After 5 minutes of shooting I got a a tap on my shoulder and it was my optician! He said he had been watching me for a while now and I'm screwing up my face far to tight when looking into the viewfinder inorder to concentrate on what I can see through that little window....
-
I don't suppose we could sue? :p :p
-
A still photographer on a film shoot showed me his Leica yesterday. I don't know the model, but it was a brand new camera.
The viewfinder was absolutely amazing. Bright, sharp, clear and a HUGE image. How soon we forget.
Peter
-
I've been thinking about the 'reshaping the orb' issue.
Two ways this could happen.
With a lot of viewfinder use you might change the shape by prolonged pressing against the eye cup. Unlikely, I think.
Or you're squinting to change the shape of your eyeball in order to change the focus of your lens. Seems like this would be better done with glasses or diopter adjustment.
If you don't want to wear glasses I seem to remember that one can have optically corrected lenses fitted to viewfinders.
(Squinting won't change your focal length - enlarge the image. It will change focus - the distance from lens to retina. That's if I correctly remember what I learned about 40 years ago. ;o)
-
Just as difficult on the eyes (at least for my 60-year-old eyes) is the LCD panel. Why, O why can't they bury this information *inside* the camera and allow us to peer at it (magnified) through a viewfinder as we do with camcorders?
The LCD panels are too small, as is the information displayed thereon, and those panels won't get any bigger. The stuff on those displays is very difficult to see in sunshine, no matter what marketing says. Putting this stuff *inside* the camera would make it far easier to see.
It's important stuff, right? Histograms and such. I've even taken to wearing dark clothing while shooting, to eliminate one variable - namely my reflection in the LCD screen.
C',mon, engineers! As Michael says: "Do they ever actually USE these cameras?"
Peter
-
Too bad he didn't know about the add on LCD hoods such as the Extend-A-View. They turn the LCD into a eyepiece viewer - complete with magnifying lens.
I had one for my first digital (Oly C2020) and it worked great. Gave me very usable TTL viewing in bright sunlight. Attached (when desired) with Velcro.
How much did/does such an item cost?
And do you think it would work with something like the da' Oly protector (http://www.daproducts.com/sdpoly.htm)?
-
Heh. If you're dodgy, you can trick people into thinking you're shooting a view camera...
You compose by two-eyed viewing of an image on a screen on the back of the camera, instead of peeping with one eye through a little "telescope".
So it *is* a view camera; just a tiny, digital, view camera.
Might this be the solution to Pom's eye problems: a digital camera with live video feed to a laptop screen?
-
Don't know how much this would help (not sure about quality and battery life), an external LCD monitor that clips to the viewfinder of an SLR camera. Even if you don't get one - I can see many reasons where this may actually come in quite handy (macro, mounting camera on end of pole to see over crowds, etc..).
Only articles I can find so far are in Korean or Hungarian.
Zigview (http://index.hu/tech/digicam/?x:2005.05.30&223965)
Someone posted an english link on FM
Zigview in English (http://www.secu-line.com/sub/product_02.html)
-
My right eye is much worse than my left eye, and I never thought it could have anything to do with photography. About two years ago, I started using my left eye and now that's going bad also. Hmmm. Or an I getting older?
Last night, I was packing for a job that got postponed today, and I stuffed my N80 body into my pack, but before I did, I looked through it and though, man, look how great this viewfinder is. When I got that camera, I remember thinking how small of a viewfinder it was.
-
We are buying N80's or Rebels which are $200-300 cameras with $500 plus of digital processing equipment added on. = D70/Drebel
...
Doesn't seem entirely proportional but R&D has to be high for the manufacture in the race to finish at the top of the heap.
About $500 sounds about right for the extra cost of the electronics that replace the film in an entry-level DSLR. For this you get, amongst other things, a sensor IC that is bigger than most PC micro-processors and sells in far smaller quantities, increasing overhead. ("APS-C" sensors are about as big as the high end Intel Itanium chips I believe). And probably you get to avoid $500 or more in film and processing costs within the first year of ownership. It was more like six months for me, and I am not nearly as trigger happy as people like Jonathan Weinke!
This seems very reasonable judged by either manufacturing and R&D costs, or by value for money.
-
It was under $20 as I recall. (That was about five years ago.)
I don't know why it wouldn't work with the protector in place. You just glue some small strips of Velcro around the LCD. Or you can hold the viewer in place if you don't want to glue to your camera.
The only downside that I found was that it was "one more thing" to pack into the field. But for shooting macros it was extremely valuable. You avoided the parallax problems - got TTL viewing that you could see in bright light.
If the LCD had been high resolution it would have made an excellent viewfinder. Shades of future EVFs to come.