[Martin KP]

I've been mindful of this subject for a while now. On each street excursion, studio photo shoot or a simple macro, the viewfinder is an important part of my work. It tells me all I need to know. And that TTL image is superb; exactly what I want to see before squeezing on the trigger. Yet, each shot requires uninterrupted viewing that is to say I don't want any light seeping into the corners of my eye.

I am a glass wearer, but I take off the glasses and adjust the Viewfinder accordingly. This is all good, because now I can put my eye up close on the viewfinder. Yet I can see light through the left side, and light through the bridge of my nose. This light isn't normally a problem in low light settings, but outside it can be a distraction. I find I fiddle with the eye far more than I should do, this time would be better spent on adjustments to the composition. For example, last month I photographed a bench over looking the sea. The sun sat at 90 degrees to the image and I remember being aware of sunlight, an obstruction to the digital viewfinder readout and a nuisance to the lighting conditions with the image itself.

I notice this is a problem common to all modern day camera's. Often, a small piece of rubber surrounding the viewfinder is believed to be enough and I agree, for most photography it is. But there is that occasion when it fails, and when it does, I take notice.

For some time, on a completely different topic, I wanted to add an x1.4 ocular. The reason for this was to improve manual focus for portrait shooting, so I bought the andoer viewfinder ocular. Totally by accident, when I added this piece of glass, I also eliminated all side light creeping in. This is because the andoer glass comes with two extra rubber mounts. One small and one large. The large cup rubber fits closely to the eye forming a nice seal and a comfortable grip. It is so good, I bought the andoer zoom 1.08 to 1.8 glass which comes with the same rubber viewfinder mounts. The two units are so versatile, they interchange easily depending on the photography subject and have become a premiant addition to the KP, my main camera.

With so much effort placed on viewfinder design, why do manufacturer's skimp on this important detail? This issue isn't confined to only Pentax. Other camera's from Nikon, Canon and Sony are all culprit to viewfinder light creep.

With camera design the way it is now, it would seem fashion overcomes function. Isn't it time manufactures give the viewfinder better ocular options as standard or at the very least provide optional additional elements to nullify light creep at the working end?

Just a thought.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[biz-engineer]

With so much effort placed on viewfinder design, why do manufacturer's skimp on this important detail?

There is no side sun in the camera lab, in the lab everything looks fine. Changing something of the design in a Japanese company takes months, years...because it's the culture of consensus, everyone has to agree before something can be done better. Also, ergonomics don't sell, reviewers recommend cameras that has the highest electronic specifications. e.g the number of mega pixel can be put in a spreadsheet, ergonomics can't be put in a spreadsheet. So , we end up with cameras with tons of functions and "performance" that no one uses, with plastic build and mediocre ergonomics. Unfortunately, there is no camera designed under the leadership of Steve Jobs, because if it was, it would be a completely different camera with totally intuitive user interface and amazing software and ergonomics.

[Francisco Carneiro]

I wish I could improve the viewfinder. This is for me as important as all the rest, in a camera. I mean, we shoot what we see... right? This shoud be a marketing argument. May be most of clients shoot in automatic... and we may be dinosaurs...Or may be there's another reason. I don't know.

[kypfer]

Being a spectacle wearer, I can sympathise with the OP. For me, being relatively short-sighted, if I remove my spectacles to use the viewfinder "optimally", I can lose sight of my subject completely, which is both a PITA and a fairly pointless exercise, so I've learned to live with it
However, my relatively recent purchase of the Pentax O-ME53 magnifying attachment has gone a good way to resolving my issues ... just a pity the extra expense was necessary, surely it's not that difficult to design a viewfinder that will work adequately when wearing spectacles!

[mikesbike]

From what I've read, there is a lot of care in designing the detachable eyecup of the VF. The type most commonly supplied on camera models, which do vary some between brands, are an effort to accommodate those who prefer shooting with their glasses on (and some have no choice because the range of diopter adjustment is insufficient for them), and those who remove their glasses. There is also a range of differences between the facial contours, eye sizes, etc between users. So the eyecup can be removed and a more tight-fitting cup can be installed. Then there are people like myself who are fine with the eyecup as is, no distraction, and like the compactness, who would not be happy with a bulky standard version.

One thing that is considered in standard eyecup design, is when wearing glasses the distance being greater from eye to VF, can the info displayed within the VF still be seen.

Up until the last 3 years, I was one who always left my glasses on, with some risk of extraneous light entering the VF at some angles, in which case I'd hold the camera so I could block that side with my hand. But since I now have had both of my eyes cleared of cataracts and have lens implants, I can put my eye directly to the VF with the standard diopter setting, which is great.

[Not a Number]

Large eyecups are optional items for many Nikon cameras, and the Pentax MF cameras. Large eyecups round or teardrop are easily found as after market items.

If you wear eyeglasses you can buy clip/slip on safety side shields painted black to block out light from the side.

[Alex645]

I notice this is a problem common to all modern day camera's. Often, a small piece of rubber surrounding the viewfinder is believed to be enough and I agree, for most photography it is. But there is that occasion when it fails, and when it does, I take notice.

For some time, on a completely different topic, I wanted to add an x1.4 ocular.

With so much effort placed on viewfinder design, why do manufacturer's skimp on this important detail? This issue isn't confined to only Pentax. Other camera's from Nikon, Canon and Sony are all culprit to viewfinder light creep.
Isn't it time manufactures give the viewfinder better ocular options as standard or at the very least provide optional additional elements to nullify light creep at the working end?

My first camera that overcame this issue was a Nikon F3 HP (high point) which aids in wearing glasses while shooting. Although I usually don't wear glasses, I appreciated the round viewfinder mount to which diopters and viewfinder cups were available accessories.

Currently, the Nikon D500, Df, D810, D850, D5, and the Pentax 645D and 645Z all offer viewfinder cups and Nikon makes a 1.2x magnifying eyepiece. I agree with you that this is something that would be nice to see in the next Pentax APC or FF DSLR.

[mikesbike]

All the APS-C Pentax Flagship bodies I own have a removable AF cup, with its own sub-frame, with the capability for replacement with another type of eyecup or magnification device. This includes my K20D, K-5, and K-5 IIs. My "entry-level" K-S2 does not have this feature, although having an excellent VF. Rather disappointingly, my KP is in the same boat as the K-S2, although its VF is otherwise superb, as is its build quality. In the past, Pentax did offer alternative cups and magnifiers. There are also eyecup blinds that fit into this space.

I imagine the Pentax K-3 series and the FF K-1 also have fully removable VF cups.