Viewfinder Coverage

[mporter012]

I was just reading about viewfinder coverage. Such strong opinions on the matter! I use an FE2, which has a 93% coverage. I didn't actually know this until about two hours ago! I better start paying more attention to my edges. The F3 has 100% coverage in the Nikon lineup.

How important is the coverage in your opinion?

[MattKing]

Much more important for slides that are to be projected than other available options.

[desertratt]

Unless you are doing some kind of super-critical work where you need to know exactly what you are/are not including in the frame, I really don't think it's something to worry about, as long as you have a pretty god idea what you are or are not getting.

[Les Sarile]

I appreciate the 100% coverage though and the Nikons were the only ones with it for that era - Nikon F, F2 & F3. However, I much prefer larger magnification then percentage of coverage. For instance the Pentax MX has 0.97X magnification and 95% coverage to the FE2's 0.86X & 93%. The result is visibly larger view. I understand that this is the tradeoff for those wearing glasses require eye-relief afforded by the smaller magnification.

[Aja B]

For less than 100% finders it's somewhat dependent on subject matter in the context of having ample time to properly account for what's obscurred while composing. I'd much prefer a 100% finder but also appreciate the compactness and lighter weight of smaller bodies. Can't have it all in one so that's why I have too many cameras! On a similar note, some slide mounts will obscure a portion of the image. I find that quite irritating.

[LJSLATER]

I have to have 100%. I'm one of those guys that files their negative carriers. I shoot E6 almost exclusively, but I don't mount it.

[MFstooges]

I didn't know some SLR have 100% view until I borrowed my friend's Nikon F2 for shooting museum collections. I struggled to get the lab print it the way I see because they keep 'excluding' some details.

[StoneNYC]

I scan everything, I don't know about enlargers, but with my scanner holder it never quite fits dead center and the top or bottom edge is always getting cut off, so I would actually prefer a tiny but of crop as I by habit shoot exactly for frame and then get stuff cut off if the viewfinder is 100% so 97% sounds perfect to me.


~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

[tkamiya]

It isn't important to me at all.

I have no idea what my F100, and other camera bodies do. I have to cut off some when I print anyway to get a nice clean border. If I'm printing full frame, dirty border style (which I do every now and then) having 5% more or whatever won't make any difference to me.

[Peltigera]

Don't see what all the fuss is about. I am quite happy using cameras with two wire frames for a viewfinder - what you get depends entirely on exactly where you put your eye. My pictures seem to work out ok.