100% Viewfinder Coverage and You.

As more manufacturers ad 100% VF's to their spec lists, I wonder how important it is to photographers out there.

Personally, I don't see it as having much, if any, impact on what I do. I don't find myself cropping the extra 2% I get in post, so I'm either just used to it, or my composition isn't so precise that the extra 2% makes much difference. Just curious how other people feel on the subject.

I will say that I don't really understand why this spec is so difficult for manufacturers to implement. The 5D MKII has 98% coverage... would it really be so hard to add the extra 2%?

I voted "no it doesn't matter" because the camera I have owned to date haven't had 100% viewfinders and I haven't had too much trouble - however...

there have been a number of situations where I'm framing very carefully to include/not include something and I can't always tell whether it it going to turn out as I want it until I take the photo and look at it onscreen. It can sometimes get frustrating having to retake a careful shot because it includes a bit of unwanted fence or something else which wasn't at all visible in the viewfinder.

Liveview on the 40D is a partial fix for certain situations, such as landscapes with a tripod, but other than that, both my 40D and my 5D suffer from losing a little off the edges of the frame in the viewfinder.

I'd appreciate 100%, but for the moment I can live without.

I guess I just take what I get. I checked: The XTi is 96% and the 5D2 is 98%. I've never had a 100% viewfinder so don't know how important it could be.

I appreciate 100%. It's nice. I don't like it when I try to keep something ugly out of the frame and then when I look at it on computer, it's still there.

But in all honesty, situations like that are few and far between. I can easily live without 100%. But I do appreciate it when I have it.

I just wish canon was able to make a decently large and bright viewfinder. They're all kinda crappy.

timnosenzo wrote in post #8538326
The 5D MKII has 98% coverage... would it really be so hard to add the extra 2%?

Yes, there are alignment issues with a 100% viewfinder so they crop off a couple percent to increase tolerances. Look at it this way, how often do you send a shot to the printer and get EXACTLY what you sent them? Never, right? You usually build in a little bleed, just in case.

ugh. i get pissed sometimes b/c i wanted a photo come out really tight...
but it turned out there was some(i mean some) gap b/w subject and the frame.
Oh well... but nothing a cropping can't do. xD

My F-1 cameras had 100% viewfinders, but my medium format cameras didn't even come close (none do). It was actually more of problem than not with film, because both negative carries and slide frames lopped off 2 or 3 percent anyway.

I can't say it has ever bothered me to have an extra 2% perimeter, not even in my most carefully composed images. Being short 2% would certainly bother me, and I once had an East-German camera that had a viewfinder skewed so far to one side that such a thing happened.

But an extra 2% when I'm doing my own cropping anyway--I've never thought twice about it.