>>4497897
This is dumb bait and not a "conversation". Use what you want dumbass

>>4497897
Anyone who actually uses the viewfinder over the screen is simply a child larping as an army man looking down the rifle scope. The viewfinder offers absolutely no advantages over the screen and anyone who uses it looks immature.

>>4497900
You are why we don’t allow women and fags to have rights, mashallah. Muhammad was right about many things.

>>4497897
Viewfinders are more usable in bright light and make it easier to hold the camera steady for long exposures or tracking moving subjects.

>>4497900
>>4497902
Also when debating EVF vs the rear screen the EVF is often better quality, higher res, OLED with greater dynamic range, and higher refresh rate.

File: 1646019669220.gif (831.6 KB)

831.6 KB GIF

>>4497900
This. So Much This.

Slightly more stupid "debate" than 35mm vs 50mm

Despite having video monitors, movie directors still use the traditional optical viewfinder on the camera to get a precise idea of colours, framing and lighting. A video monitor/evf can be deceptive in all of these concerns. They are also useless in bright light, and give unrealistic representation in dark conditions.

>>4497911
>A video monitor/evf ... give[s] unrealistic representation in dark conditions.
This was such a big issue for me when I got my first mirrorless camera I had to keep reminding myself. Eventually I learned that going off the histo and light meter was a far better idea and got used to that, but it's just a non-issue with OVFs

>>4497900
Absolutely based. Viewfinders are for unc millennials.

>>4497902
Yeah and muhammad also fucked kids so who cares really?
>Viewfinders are more usable in bright light
I don't have this problem.
>easier to hold the camera steady for long exposures or tracking moving subjects.
Use a tripod then? Are you dumb? You think holding your camera like a widdle army man is gonna fix your issues? At best it's placebo.
>>4497905
Any respectable photographer doesn't care about these things. Keep throwing acronyms and technical jargon around and see if your photography improves (it won't).
>>4497907
Low tier bait.

This whole thread is clearly bot posting

tiltable EVFs are awesome.

>>4497929
>LIKE an army man
Im israeli. I AM an army man. We have mandatory service. Sorry your society is weak.

Zutt boy up there is the only based person in this thread. He might be an amalek goy but at least he has balls.

>>4497897
only advantage an evf gives you is clear picture in a sunny day. Otherwise you end up with similar photo angles due to consistent height (even if you crouch occasionally), drains battery faster, and will build wrinkles around your eyes over time

File: 1615152585143.gif (776.1 KB)

776.1 KB GIF

>>4497990
>Thinks being trained to carpet bomb civilians makes him tough

>>4497897
>>4497900
>>4497906
>>4497916
>>4498081
ITT auto mode shooters expose themselves

File: MG_3745_copy.low__jpg.jpg (97.7 KB)

97.7 KB JPG

>>4497897
A compact or rangefinder-size body with a hotshoe-mounted tilting EVF is the absolute peak of modern mirrorless design. I wish more manufacturers did this for their compact bodies instead of squeezing a shitty 2.36m dot built-in EVF in the corner of the body or not bothering with an EVF at all.
The best part about this is that if you don't want it, you can just not buy it.

>>4498243
how about you post your justification for the viewfinder then so we can have some conversation, you fatherless retard. Or maybe you're motherless, whichever harmed your upbringing.

>>4498245
You know any add-on EVF would be just as small and low res, Sigma made one for the FP that was a bit better but it's a big monstrosity that sticks off the side of the body.

File: OIP.A_IusnwNWSi2CLcHwPUZ4gHaGU.png (292.2 KB)

292.2 KB PNG

>>4498257
I wouldn't mind if it just stuck out the side of the body, but it sticks out the side AND top.
You may as well go with a conventional body with centered "pentaprism" hump EVF in that case.

My camera doesn't have any screens or electronics so I guess I'm firmly camp viewfinder

File: Dzm5YbT.jpg (207.7 KB)

207.7 KB JPG

>>4497897
Why not both? You can use the flippy screen to compose when you're shooting low or high angle and the viewfinder when shooting on eye level or it's bright outside and the screen brightness fails you.

File: fz50_screen2.jpg (9.8 KB)

9.8 KB JPG

sucks that they don't make screens that articulate like this anymore.

>>4498261
Your nuianced approach is not condusive to the titular /p/oo flinging that is idenities this board

>>4498295
Difficult to use when on a tripod and for low level shooting you have to rotate the screen as well as flipping it out.

>>4498261
Why not a pair of glasses that has a HUD with direct connection to your comeras output? You already look like a huge dork using a flippy screen.

File: PanasonicFZ50_screen.jpg (10.9 KB)

10.9 KB JPG

>>4498297
>Difficult to use when on a tripod
for selfies only

>for low level shooting you have to rotate the screen as well as flipping it out.
If you keep the screen normally exposed yes, but if you keep the screen normally protected, no.

Honestly I use the screen 95 per percent of the time but I have glasses

>>4498299
>Have to switch off cameras airplane mode and pair to glasses everytime you want to take a pic
lol no

>>4498328
It will be extremely snappy and the glasses are stylish.

I like the isolation of me and what I'm photographing that the viewfinder gives me, but I don't like how my greasy ass nose leaves smudges all over my screen when I use it. Also when I wear glasses it doesn't work as well.

>>4498301
>>4498333
Imagine wearing glasses

>>4498337
Just send me Lasik money and I won't have to

File: Review-Sony-A6700-4.jpg (209.4 KB)

209.4 KB JPG

>>4498333
>I like the isolation of me and what I'm photographing that the viewfinder gives me, but I don't like how my greasy ass nose leaves smudges all over my screen when I use it
reversible screens are the best for this reason, also protects the screen from scratches during carry.

>>4498411
That camera looks insanely obese. Wtf?

>>4498427
Fat camera for fat hands.

>>4497990
Yet you still can't hold a camera? Go change your diaper.

>>4498299
>cares about looks
No one asked, woman.

File: 320439.jpg (29.8 KB)

29.8 KB JPG

>>4498257
*blocks your path*

>>4498464
This fucking pisses me off. "I'm gonna buy a rangefinder camera and then an addon so I don't have to use a rangefinder camera"

Until today I wasn't aware that this shit existed and now my day is ruined. Fuck you.

File: Leica_M-EV1_front.png (155.1 KB)

155.1 KB PNG

>>4498476
Nah, it's incredibly based. First of all, the rangefinder is dogshit for lenses longer than 75mm, and even then with faster 50mm you'd want to use live view at least.
Second, you're half right on the spirit of it. What Leica should have done is put out the M-EV1 without a viewfinder at all like pic rel concept, and had people use it with the Visoflex EVF from my previous post. THAT would have been insanely based and a great business move for them too to push more accessory sales. But they're German faggots so they did it the way they did instead.

>>4498476
>now my day is ruined
Not yet.
Consider this: some people mount cheap chinese lenses on their Leica M.
Now it is.

File: Visoflex-III-Reflex-Housing-With-Leica-M8-eBay6.jpg (147.5 KB)

147.5 KB JPG

>>4498476
Look at what it used to be.

>>4498479
I choose to not accept this information. If I refuse to believe it, then it cannot affect me.

>>4498480
Now for some reason I like this. I think its how clunky and German it is. It feels like something you would see in a dentists office. Fundamentally they're the same but this just seems less wrong somehow.

>>4498477
You're right. I saw the 35mm lens on the product photo you posted and didn't think about lenses it would actually be useful with.

File: Nikkor_70-300mm_AF-P_VR_review-2.jpg (140 KB)

140 KB JPG

>>4497897
if you use a long zoom lens the viewfinder bearing on your brow provides a much needed 3rd point of stability.

>>4498635
Use a tripod. I hate ibis for making wildlife photographers think going out without a tripod is smart.
>I can go up to iso 16000 with no problem!!!! I can cope with being shaky because of dual IS and ai autofocus!!!!!!!
It looks like SHIT your ai denoise and sharpening looks like SHIT, you will never produce a beautiful image of an animal.

File: motion-blurred-grey-squirrel-C53XGB.jpg (225.1 KB)

225.1 KB JPG

>>4498636
IBIS or tripod only helps with a still animal.
IBIS isn't very effective at telephoto range, lens OIS is more effective at the long end,
Modern stabilization is quite good, like 2 seconds handheld as sharp as tripod with the same settings is possible.
but none of the above helps with a moving subject. It will help keeping the background from smearing

The problem isn't tripod or lack of but people not learning to control their exposure by keeping ISO as low as possible and using exposure compensation or manual mode to allow for a darker image with a faster shutter speed.

>>4498636
Tripod too heavy

File: PEDCO-ULTRAPOD-3-MINI-TRAVEL-TRIPOD-W-PHONE-MOUNT.jpg (167.8 KB)

167.8 KB JPG

>>4498649
I take one of these on outings.
The strap allows you to securely lash the tripod to a tree branch or narrow trunk if you need it at a higher level.

>>4498647
Tripod actually helps a lot with moving animals, just not on the exposure side, especially with large teles. Tracking becomes much easier.
The problem I have with the paradigm of "as low and ISO as possible" is it becomes easy to settle for mediocrity because what if your animal moves suddenly etc. then cope in post. Most of the time the photo wasn't worth taking to begin with.
Your example photo is perfect, who cares about eastern squirrels running shot from head level. A tripod encourages composition and planning and waiting.

>>4498656
Oh shit these are actually useful? I thought they were a gimmick

File: Panasonic_GX9-evf.jpg (238.4 KB)

238.4 KB JPG

>>4498476
>>4498464
>Panasonic had the best implementation of all time and nothing has ever come close since
Weird

>>4498781
too bad they put a rubbish field sequential EVF on it.

>>4498243
if they could expose themselves they wouldn't be in auto mode