By default I use the viewfinder. I use the tilt LCD screen on the back of my camera when using the viewfinder is not a possibility (e.g, shooting above the head, close to the ground, waist level)
My aging eyes need reading glasses now. So I absolutely prefer using a viewfinder so I can wear my regular (I’m a nearsighted person who has worn glasses for most of my life) glasses and line up a shot through the viewfinder of my camera and have no vision or clarity issues. When I’m out with my iPhone only, I don’t have my reading glasses with, and it’s a challenge to use the screen to shoot because it’s difficult to see it crisply and clearly. So, I am someone who always preferred viewfinders anyway who actually has a physical need to use it now. I’m surprised I haven’t really heard other people talk about this (aging eyes) aspect of screen-versus-viewfinder.
As you said, with film cameras, not really a choice, except a few medium format which allows to switch the viewfinder from a waist level to an eye level one. I mostly shoot medium format cameras on film with a waist level viewfinder, I prefer my digital camera to have a tilting screen for more flexibility.
With my 4*5 and 8*10 cameras, the ground glasse is the only option, but what an option. Even 6*6cm medium format, it is such a joy to see the complete image unaffected by the camera electronics. The current electronic eyepieces and screens automatically adjust colour and luminosity and give a false sense of the colour and light in the scene.
90% of the time my natural preference is viewfinder as it feels more intuitive. Having said that, there are times when being able to gaze at the screen is invaluable (awkwardly positioned or low level macro shots and occasional moon shots with magnified live view for precise focus as two examples). Now, here's a thought... when you're using an old tlr or an slr film camera with a waist-level finder, are you once again viewing on a screen? I have to admit, there is something special about a wlf and that almost holographic view...
my bronica and liubitel both have, on top of the waist level viewfinder, the small loupe on top which i use sometimes for precise focusing. the zeiss nettar has only a viefinder (small if you ask me), no waist level.
My most recent adventures with a wlf were with my old Exa, the screen probably a similar size to those screens on older digicams. Vertical compositions are fun with it, as you can imagine. A 'normal' eye-level prism finder would have been so much easier..
I used to always prefer a viewfinder but over time I've come to use the LCD more often. With more deliberative shots I would still prefer the viewfinder, and obviously in very bright light a viewfinder is better .
Viewfinder for me. But your question made me think it through... My film cameras, obviously, and the Nikon F3 HP viewfinder was made bigger and suits glasses wearers like me. It's roomy in there! My Canon 5D has a screen but not a tilt one. I just don't use it but I probably would for video. All the info I need ( and usually ignore to my detriment) is in the viewfinder. Same with my smaller Fuji. But I had a go with a more entry level Canon 650D which has a tilt screen and makes the settings easier if not at least equal. So I guess it's part the camera as well as personal preference - which would still be the viewfinder!
I primarily shoot with my Canon 6D using the optical viewfinder. However, for night photography when my camera is tripod-mounted, I switch to the LCD screen on the back. The LCD provides a brighter, easier view for composing and focusing in low light, whereas the optical viewfinder becomes too dark and difficult to use in these conditions.
If the camera has a viewfinder, regardless of digital or analog, I will always use it. Except for my phone, I’m not a fan of using the screen to compose an image. Maybe because I wear glasses.
Viewfinder always. I feel I am into the frame :) and I like that.
By default I use the viewfinder. I use the tilt LCD screen on the back of my camera when using the viewfinder is not a possibility (e.g, shooting above the head, close to the ground, waist level)
Lcd screen to set shutter speed and iso, then viewfinder to take the shot.
I'm left-eyed so the viewfinder is not comfortable. Also it gives me a better overview
I’m also left eyed but only learned recently that was abnormal and other people didn’t have to awkwardly shove their face in the camera!
Yep. Hence the preference for the viewfinder, haha
I always got my nose on the screen 😂
Same!
My aging eyes need reading glasses now. So I absolutely prefer using a viewfinder so I can wear my regular (I’m a nearsighted person who has worn glasses for most of my life) glasses and line up a shot through the viewfinder of my camera and have no vision or clarity issues. When I’m out with my iPhone only, I don’t have my reading glasses with, and it’s a challenge to use the screen to shoot because it’s difficult to see it crisply and clearly. So, I am someone who always preferred viewfinders anyway who actually has a physical need to use it now. I’m surprised I haven’t really heard other people talk about this (aging eyes) aspect of screen-versus-viewfinder.
As you said, with film cameras, not really a choice, except a few medium format which allows to switch the viewfinder from a waist level to an eye level one. I mostly shoot medium format cameras on film with a waist level viewfinder, I prefer my digital camera to have a tilting screen for more flexibility.
With my 4*5 and 8*10 cameras, the ground glasse is the only option, but what an option. Even 6*6cm medium format, it is such a joy to see the complete image unaffected by the camera electronics. The current electronic eyepieces and screens automatically adjust colour and luminosity and give a false sense of the colour and light in the scene.
I will take the ground glass any day.
90% of the time my natural preference is viewfinder as it feels more intuitive. Having said that, there are times when being able to gaze at the screen is invaluable (awkwardly positioned or low level macro shots and occasional moon shots with magnified live view for precise focus as two examples). Now, here's a thought... when you're using an old tlr or an slr film camera with a waist-level finder, are you once again viewing on a screen? I have to admit, there is something special about a wlf and that almost holographic view...
my bronica and liubitel both have, on top of the waist level viewfinder, the small loupe on top which i use sometimes for precise focusing. the zeiss nettar has only a viefinder (small if you ask me), no waist level.
My most recent adventures with a wlf were with my old Exa, the screen probably a similar size to those screens on older digicams. Vertical compositions are fun with it, as you can imagine. A 'normal' eye-level prism finder would have been so much easier..
I used to always prefer a viewfinder but over time I've come to use the LCD more often. With more deliberative shots I would still prefer the viewfinder, and obviously in very bright light a viewfinder is better .
Viewfinder for me. But your question made me think it through... My film cameras, obviously, and the Nikon F3 HP viewfinder was made bigger and suits glasses wearers like me. It's roomy in there! My Canon 5D has a screen but not a tilt one. I just don't use it but I probably would for video. All the info I need ( and usually ignore to my detriment) is in the viewfinder. Same with my smaller Fuji. But I had a go with a more entry level Canon 650D which has a tilt screen and makes the settings easier if not at least equal. So I guess it's part the camera as well as personal preference - which would still be the viewfinder!
Always viewfinder except on my phone where I have no choice.
If I have a choice, I will choose the viewfinder. But if the camera without one is better for the "job", then a screen will work too...
I primarily shoot with my Canon 6D using the optical viewfinder. However, for night photography when my camera is tripod-mounted, I switch to the LCD screen on the back. The LCD provides a brighter, easier view for composing and focusing in low light, whereas the optical viewfinder becomes too dark and difficult to use in these conditions.
Both 😉. Depending on the situation
With my phone, I must look at the screen to compose the shot, but I always peep the viewfinder as my preference.
If the camera has a viewfinder, regardless of digital or analog, I will always use it. Except for my phone, I’m not a fan of using the screen to compose an image. Maybe because I wear glasses.