Trouble Composing with EVF

[Csacwp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've had my SL for a year now, having come from the M system. I find it very difficult to make good compositions with the WYSIWUG EVF. For some reason I find it distracting and difficult to focus quickly, and then my composition is terrible using it, whereas I have no trouble with a rangefinder. Has anybody else had a similar experience, and have they overcome it? After a year of struggling with it I am considering returning to the M and selling the SL.

[thighslapper]

No. 

 

My compositional ability and focussing is enhanced by the EVF. 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[LD_50]

You can use the EVF with nothing showing, completely clear of information.

 

I can’t see any reason it would be distracting and have not had issues going between Nikon OVF, Sony EVF, MP rangefinder, and SL EVF.

[ramarren]

What is it about the viewfinder that you find distracting?

[Csacwp]

I think it’s having my eye so close to a screen. I try to look at all aspects of the screen and it feels like I’m looking all over the place... it’s hard to explain. I disabled the grid and that helped somewhat. Of course, I have a far better rate of in-focus shots using the EVF, so it’s not all bad. I just am having trouble composing portraits for some reason and am screwing up shots that I’d nail on the M.

[erudolph]

Do you wear glasses?

[LD_50]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The M experience is different with the frame lines.

 

It sounds like the magnification and eyepoint are what you’re describing. The SL is about as good as it gets in those areas for TTL eyelevel viewfinders.

[Jeff S]

Do you shoot with the M RF using 28mm frame lines (or wider by estimation)? If not, maybe you're not used to composing using the entire VF and having your eye wander to the edges. The experience could be compounded by coupling that with a lens having a more narrow field of view.

 

Jeff

Edited October 24, 2017 by Jeff S

[jaapv]

I don’t think that the absence of framelines and extra area is the problem, but the fact that the EVF shows DOF, emphasizing objects in the plane of focus.

Maybe being aware of this effect will help your compositions.

[LocalHero1953]

Fact: my compositions with the SL are far better than with the M240.

Evidence: I mostly crop my M shots, but SL shots only minimally.

Explanation: partly because I've allowed for inaccurate frame lines, but also because my composing mind on the M is misled to take account of elements outside the frame - the down side of 'seeing outside the frame', which otherwise can be useful.

Assumption: that I'm a good judge of composition .

Edited October 24, 2017 by LocalHero1953

[ramarren]

I think it’s having my eye so close to a screen. I try to look at all aspects of the screen and it feels like I’m looking all over the place... it’s hard to explain. I disabled the grid and that helped somewhat. Of course, I have a far better rate of in-focus shots using the EVF, so it’s not all bad. I just am having trouble composing portraits for some reason and am screwing up shots that I’d nail on the M.

 

 

The issue for you is probably just the 'muscle memory' of having worked with a rangefinder for a long time. This difference in viewing is pretty much the same between an M and any SLR camera too. If you always used just one type of camera before and this is a different type, it will take a while and some study for you to accommodate it and be comfortable. You have to be conscious of the difference and let go of the preconceptions that come from using a different type of viewing system. 

 

For me, since I've almost always had optical tunnel viewfinder cameras alongside SLRs, the switch between them is pretty natural ... My eye knows what to expect from long practice and I don't notice that I'm looking at the presented image differently. In my best zen moments with either, the camera disappears from between me and the subject I'm working on and I just look at the subject, frame what I want, and capture it.

 

That takes time and concentrated effort to reach...

[Irakly Shanidze]

It is not the EVF, but seeing through the lens that makes it distracting, especially when you go wide, or tele. It is the linear distortion that makes your brain ho haywire. Using fast primes also does it, as their limited depth of field changes the image quite a bit. 

 

I know this from switching to SLR after 10 years of using rangefinder cameras back in film days. What ends up happening, your focus shifts from  the scene to the lens effect, and pictures become more shallow in terms of their semantic value, even if the visual is great. Focusing with a rangefinder, on the other hand, makes the eye look for something interesting, and since there is no eye candy to substitute for something that is much harder to find, you end up doing just that: expending your energy on looking for something meaningful

[ramarren]

Maybe it is that way for you, Irakly, and for some others too. But I can assure you that it isn’t that way for me and most of the people I know who shoot with both RF and TTL type cameras.

[Csacwp]

Jeff, I think you’re on to something. I never shot wider than 35mm on my M but tended to use 50mm or 90mm.

[Irakly Shanidze]

Maybe it is that way for you, Irakly, and for some others too. But I can assure you that it isn’t that way for me and most of the people I know who shoot with both RF and TTL type cameras.

 

This opinion based not only on my own observations, but on my interviewing more than a hundred professional and advanced amateur photographers, which I did while writing a book. Based on results of this poll backed by two years of psychology in graduate school, I am inclined to think that you and most people that you know are outliers.

[thighslapper]

...... add me to the outliers then ......

 

You may be correct, Irakly, when it comes to changing systems and initial use, but I very much doubt this effect persists with habituation. 

 

Whilst a few might not have the cerebral plasticity to adjust and compensate, most folk do. 

 

Driving L and R hand drive cars becomes second nature after a while .... and those that drive both don't even think about it when they turn the ignition ......

[scott kirkpatrick]

....

 

Driving L and R hand drive cars becomes second nature after a while .... and those that drive both don't even think about it when they turn the ignition ......

I don't know about the last point.  I enjoy driving RHD once in a while (typically for 1-2 weeks every 5 years), but it takes about 120% of my attention just to go around a traffic circle the right way.  I've not gotten to the point where I could just flip a mental switch and forget it.  The gearshift does feel right in the left hand, though.

Edited October 28, 2017 by scott kirkpatrick

[scott kirkpatrick]

I don't know about the last point.  I enjoy driving RHD once in a while (typically for 1-2 weeks every 5 years), but it takes about 120% of my attention just to go around a traffic circle the right way.  I've not gotten to the point where I could just flip a mental switch and forget it.  The gearshift does feel right in the left hand, though.  I rented a car for a few days in Japan once.  That raised the attention demand to about 200%.

[Irakly Shanidze]

...... add me to the outliers then ......

 

You may be correct, Irakly, when it comes to changing systems and initial use, but I very much doubt this effect persists with habituation. 

 

Whilst a few might not have the cerebral plasticity to adjust and compensate, most folk do. 

 

Driving L and R hand drive cars becomes second nature after a while .... and those that drive both don't even think about it when they turn the ignition ......

 

what happens is, when switching between RF and TTL viewfinders, there is an adaptation period during which the effect may be overwhelming for some. After the adaptation period the effect is no longer noticeable, but results (pictures, that is) do look different. TTL images tend to be more form oriented, while RF photos are more content oriented.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[LD_50]

what happens is, when switching between RF and TTL viewfinders, there is an adaptation period during which the effect may be overwhelming for some. After the adaptation period the effect is no longer noticeable, but results (pictures, that is) do look different. TTL images tend to be more form oriented, while RF photos are more content oriented.

I switch between SL and MP with several M lenses. I cannot reliably tell the difference between shots between the two cameras. It’s the lenses that change my shooting habits more than the viewfinder.