Our digital camera viewfinder campaign continues…

I commend Which for this campaign – in fact I commend anyone associated with it. Never mind sharper viewing screens with anti-glare, my Nikon has a very reasonable screen but in bright sunlight it’s hopeless. One wonders if manufacturers have actually tried to use their products in the real world. They fit fantastic zoom lenses and fail to realise that it’s almost impossible to find a small subject quickly when the lens is zoomed without a viewfinder – you have to zoom in on it, by which time the bird has flown. Even if the subject is large composing a decent picture can be very difficult in bright light and it’s often impossible to tell even approximately how much zoom has been employed. As I am a long distance trekker a small camera is essential so don’t tell me to carry an SLR! While on the subject of the inadequacies of modern cameras the makers might also like to consider the fact that there is no electricity on the top of Ben Macdui so recharging the battery is impossible. There is nothing wrong with relatively inexpensive AA lithiums and spares work just fine!

I have been following the debate on viewfinders versus screens with interest, especially as we now have to purchase a new camera, thanks to the pre-mature failure of our current Canon camera, an A620.

This camera has the benefit of a true (but not very good) viewfinder and also a rotatable (swivel) screen. When the first cameras appeared without a viewfinder I was horrified at the thought of a camera without one (and still am to some extent). However, in looking at replacements for our current camera, what I am even more horrified about is the very few there are with swivel screens. Even more surprising, they are not even mentioned in the Which? review tables. I have to admit, after using the swivel screen extensively, if I have to do without a viewfinder or swivel screen, it would be (shock, horror!) the viewfinder – although it’s looking as though we will have to do without both (or return to a film camera!). The reason for this choice is that, looking back, it is probably true to say that the number of times the viewfinder has been used is very, very small but the advantage of the swivel screen has been utilised for virtually every shot; indeed, I can’t really recall using the screen as though fixed and holding the camera ‘at eye level’.

Why are there not more swivel screens – presumably lack of demand and cost. The lack of demand is no doubt due to users not realising the massive advantage of swivel screens, not helped by Which? who virtually ignore them. Perhaps it is because the testers haven’t tried using them long enough (or perhaps themselves aren’t particularly interested in photography) to come to appreciate their advantages. These include –

being able to held the camera firmly against your body or a solid object (like a wall) (as opposed to holding it at eye level away from the body – about the most unsteady position possible!) ;

being able to take a picture at an angle, thus ensuring the sun is not shining directly on the screen;

being able to see the screen clearly (without being a contortionist) when taking pictures above head level or low down (like actually looking up at a pet’s face or taking low level close ups);

being able to take surreptitious pictures by appearing to be not taking a picture!

I could go on!

The only disadvantage is that, due to the design constraints, the screen tends to be slightly smaller than a fixed screen – but this is trivial compared to the advantages.

Are there any cameras out there with swivel screens. I know Canon have 2 (fairly expensive) but I am dubious about buying another Canon after our current one failing after light usage so are there any others?

Meanwhile, can Which? take a little more notice of this fantastic feature and mount a campaign for swivel (rotatable) screens – and educate people in their advantages which far out weigh the (admittedly major) loss of a good viewfinder.

I’m a bit late adding my view, but like Roger B it is emphatically ‘no viewfinder, no sale’. I haven’t and won’t ever own a camera without one. As a keen photographer, I regularly get asked to use other people’s cameras on their behalf and I really struggle to see any detail at all on an LCD screen, even if you can swivel it. Like Peter Jones I’ve been holding off buying a new compact camera for nearly two years because I can’t find a suitable one with a viewfinder. It’s the FIRST thing I look for when looking at new Which reports on cameras. As ‘Granache’ says the best viewfinders have an adjustable focus so that if you need reading glasses you can put them away and simply enjoy your photography.

And Roger B rounds it off quite nicely, ‘The viewfinder is the first thing I try when buying a camera. No viewfinder, no sale.’

I just do not get it. It is so difficult to take a picture with just an LCD. I agree that at times it can be useful, if you are trying to take a picture from an angle of position you can not get to naturally by moving your head, so the best option is both.

I thought companies were supposed to supply products people wanted? Is that not the case any more. Oh, hang on, I get it. They want to charge extra for an electrical view finder accessory. Ok, I get that. I want something more customised for me, so yes, may be I will buy that electronic view finder. But now I have something that sticks out and now makes my nice compact something that snags in my pocket and can not slipped in and out quickly. Oh, yes, silly me, I can detach the view finder. Hmm, now where did I put that nice electronic view finder I had.

Might just as well use the camera on my iPhone for happy snapping so I do not have to carry two almost identical objects around with me, actually I do. Lost camera sales anyone?

Bought a Canon A1200 at the weekend from PC world for £89. I went to lots of dedicated camera shops but this was the only place I could find a small camera with a VF, I said to the shop assistant that I was hoping for something a little more sophisticated, She said, “but this is a perfectly good camera”, and do you know what, she is right it is. As well as having a VF it also, as previously mentioned by Rich, takes real batteries (2xAA) and a standard SD card.

Also, the nice young lady in PC World (Kingston) was trying to help me get what I wanted, a small compact with a viewfinder, unlike the other camera shops that saw me as a bloke and instantly tried to sway me towards an outfit with interchangeable lenses. Done that in the past and never used it.

I have my Olympus SP550UZ that I love (I even managed to repaired it my self when I cracked the LCD) and now my A1200 for slipping in my pocket. The SP55)UZ is great for want I want, out door happy snapping with a good optical zoom when I am out and about, had it for 5 years now. My only negative comment on it is that the shutter speed is a little slow at times. But I am sticking with it.

I’ve gone back to using 35mm compacts because of the lack of viewfinders on digital compact cameras. I won’t be buying a digital until viewfinders are reintroduced.

Also –

How about a fixed focal length compact, say 35mm equivalent?
How about manual or zone focusing, to reduce shutter lag?
How about reducing the megapixel count to around 6-8mpx, to improve low light sensitivity?
How about allowing us to shoot in Raw and add the white balance setting later, in camera?

The Perfect Camera – portable, fast lens and operation, VERY easy to use (too many features get in the way!!), not £400 at full retail.

Until then, Fuji and my local lab will be getting my money.