Nov
7
I’m selling for the brand new digital camera, as well as all the models which seductiveness me have no viewfinder, “LCD only.” This seems similar to it competence be the problem, given if the LCD shade breaks, or there is the glisten upon the screen, it will be formidable to line up the great shot. How critical is the viewfinder upon the digital camera, as well as because do so most compress as well as subcompact cameras have LCD only, rsther than than the viewfinder as well as as well as LCD similar to the alternative cameras I’ve owned? Do we have any suggestions for the great camera underneath $400 with great shiver lag?
Written by Digital Product Reviews
Related posts:
- Use digital camera reviews to find the best digital cameras A examination of digital cameras is a many appropriate found...
- What Is A Good Digital Camera For A Beginner Photographer? I am unequivocally meddlesome in photography as well as we...
- What Is A Good, Yet Inexpensive, Digital Camera To Buy? I am fourteen years aged as well as seeking for...
- Buying A Digital Camera Buying A Digital Camera When it comes to shopping a...
- Can anyone tell me where i can view a video tutorial for my new camera i just got? We only got the Sony Cybershot H50 this week...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Tags: how, Important, IS, The, Viewfinder
November 7th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Not important. You will not use it. The only time it may be helpful is when you are outside and the sun is so bright you can’t see your screen really well. My camera does not have one and I am fine with that. The one I have is the Fuji Finepix F20. I did a lot of research and it got really good reviews from professional photographers. It is simple to use and takes great pics and is priced very competitively for all the features.
November 7th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
when the batteries are low you can turn off the display to conserve power
November 7th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Large LCD viewfinders eat batteries. It seems nice to have a big LCD monitor, but they are power hungry. You will have to do what you can to turn the thing off as soon as you don’t need it any longer. Look for “Power Save” in your menu. Set it to shut off at the shortest possible innterval after you take the picture. Set it so that it doesn’t not display unless you tap the shutter button to wake it up. Even this will not go a long way towards conserving batteries.
Of course, rechargeable batteries are the way to go, but you might want to get some Energizer e² Lithium batteries for cameras. They cost twice as much, but last four times as long.
I lament the passing of the optical viewfinder and I would choose almost any camera with an optical viewfinder over one that only has an LCD viewfinder. Why?
1. You never have the option of turning off the LCD and these things eat batteries for lunch and spit them out. Why do away with the option of a viewfinder that has zero electrical drain?
2. It can be difficult to see the image on an LCD in bright sunlight, even if they are “new and improved.”
3. You have to hold an LCD viewer out at some distance in front of your face. This is more conspicuous than I prefer to be all the time.
4. The need to hold a camera at arms length will introduce some shake. I like the idea of stabilizing a camera against my face when I am taking a picture. This is especially important with a longer zoom lens. No wonder “image stablization” or “vibration reduction” is necessary with these cameras. Not that there’s anything WRONG with IS or VR, but it is really a requirement with LCD viewfinders and telephoto lenses.
5. Using the LCD to view photos after you’ve taken them slows down the camera quite a bit. You can’t shut of the LCD monitor and still take pictures if you don’t have an optical viewfinder.
November 7th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
If the LCD screen breaks, you are unlikely to have a usable camera. The viewfinder becomes vital when the day is so bright that you can’t see the screen or so dark unless it has back lighting. I use the viewfinder on my Nikon 995 about 1 shot in 10.
November 7th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
As an old-timer who has owned Single Lens Reflex cameras since 1971 I can’t imagine not having an optical viewfinder.
I do kinda enjoy watching people trying to take photos while holding the camera between thumb and forefinger with the camera 2′ from their face. I often wonder what kind of results they get…
November 7th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
I recently purchased a Kodak Camera from Staples and so far has been a great buy. You have the option of using the LCD or the viewfinder. Also, it has a very good optical zoom, which will allow for more artistic photos if you’re interested. They have several Kodaks, but the one I’m referring to cost three hundred and was on sale for two hundred and fifty. Consumer reports gave it a good rating.
Good Luck!
November 7th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
It won’t eat your batteries nearly as quick as using the LCD screen exclusively. My Sony DSC-H2 is just 1 second between shots. 6 megapixels, 12X optical zoom. Gives excellent 8X10 and has image stabilizer. Comes with battery charger, and has viewfinder. I always use the viewfinder.
November 7th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
The LDC gives you “what you see is what you get” whereas a viewfinder won’t always give you this. Let’s say you’re lining up a nice closeup shot of a flower.. The viewfinder is a good inch away from the shutter, so your picture will be off center, or worse, cropped. This applies to regular point and shoot cameras, in an SLR, you look through the lens via the viewfinder. I don’t have info on shutter lag, maybe you should visit http://www.dpreview.com/ this is a site which users review digital cameras of all kinds.
November 7th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
The view finder is not that important and a lot of times if you use the veiw finder your shots will be mis lined since your not looking thought the lens but a spot slightly higher and sometimes to one side.