Misaligned OVF - any suggestions pls?

Dillybythesea · #1 (**permalink**) 10-09-2009, 04:10 PM

I wonder if anyone has had any joy complaining about Canon OVFs? I bought a Canon Powershot A1100 from simplyelectronics.net recently, as pocket camera for walks to record insects for later identification. I chose the Canon because it has a viewfinder which my eyesight needs, as well as the LCD.

After not many days of learning how to use the camera I discovered that the viewfinder is so misaligned that, when shooting macro, the insect centred in frame using the viewfinder ends up right at the edge of shot, or even out of shot, when the pictures are reviewed at home. Subsequent surfing online seems to suggest Canon viewfinders are often misaligned, with many people accepting they’ll just have to use the LCD instead.

I returned the camera within 14 days stating the problem. Since then, in three weeks’ of chasing them, simplyelectronics.net have emailed back twice telling me there is no problem with the focus on the camera. As the problem has nothing to do with focus I am getting very frustrated! For me, the combination of viewfinder and macro was the whole purpose of the camera. If they next respond that for macro shots they advise using the LCD, or that the viewfinder is only a guide, or is within the manufacturer’s tolerances, or some such, does anyone have any ideas what can I do next, please?

earthdragon64 · #2 (**permalink**) 10-09-2009, 04:20 PM

Try your local Citizens Advice office or Trading Standards. I have to say, I don't like LCD screens for taking shots either. With my eyesight, it's very hit and miss whether anything is in focus if that's all there is. I only use the viewfinder with my camera, I just wouldn't be happy at all if it was misaligned.

I hope you manage to get it sorted, let us know how you get on.

thunder · #3 (**permalink**) 10-09-2009, 04:40 PM

I don't think many (if any) cameras with an optical viewfinder will have the capability to align macro shots accurately through the viewfinder. The viewfinder will be set up so that it is correct for distance shots - the closer the subject gets, the more difference there will be between what the lens sees and what the viewfinder sees. I expect you will find something to this effect in the manual. (But if the manual says you can use the viewfinder for macro shots, you have a case against them, of course.) Film cameras used to have parallax marks in the viewfinder, to help you realign close up shots. But if you absolutely need to see an accurate portrayal of what the lens sees, I believe you will have to get an SLR.

henrya

Meta menardi · #4 (**permalink**) 10-09-2009, 04:50 PM

It is a problem with almost any camera, since the viewfinder is not near to the lens, comparatively speaking. This doesn't matter when the object being photographed is a distance away, but when the camera is used for macro shots, it does cause a problem. On my Nikon, the shortest distance is something like 4 cm for macro shots, and the distance between the viewfinder and the lens is about 3 cm. Since the viewfinder is set to be as close to parallel to the lens, it is going to cause a problem, and I can't see how it can be accomodated without some fancy coupling between the focus distance and the angle of the viewfinder. When doing film photography I ended up making a wire frame to get round this, that fastened to the ring of the lens.

Dillybythesea · #5 (**permalink**) 10-09-2009, 05:01 PM

Thank you for that helpful response - which all feeds into my learning curve. I take your point about looking to see if the manual expressly refers to a viewfinder/ macro combination being possible - but I do feel that if in the selling points they say...

'The bright 2.5” LCD allows easy viewing of images and video. Choose between LCD and the optical viewfinder (OVF) to frame shots'

you could reasonably assume that this choice exists for ANY shot?

Yes, fortunately I do have an Olympus E0500, total joy, but a bit too heavy and precious to cart on dog walks - hence wanting the pocket camera.

Dillybythesea · #6 (**permalink**) 10-09-2009, 05:08 PM

Thank you Earthdragon 64. I hadn't thought of it and yes I will try the CAB.

I'm still struggling to post messages and replies. If I were to try to report back on this in due course, would I simply find my original question/ thread and add it at the end, please?

earthdragon64 · #7 (**permalink**) 10-09-2009, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dillybythesea

I'm still struggling to post messages and replies. If I were to try to report back on this in due course, would I simply find my original question/ thread and add it at the end, please?

You could start a new thread, but adding a reply to this one would probably be easier and save you repeating yourself. If you look near the top of the page, roughly in the middle, there is an icon with "My Posts", if you click that, it has a list of any threads that you have posted on. I've found that's the quickest, easiest way to find a thread I've contributed to.

Good luck, I hope you get it sorted to your satisfaction.

Dillybythesea · #8 (**permalink**) 10-09-2009, 05:39 PM

Thanks a lot. I see the My posts tag. All good stuff!

RichBrew · #9 (**permalink**) 11-09-2009, 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dillybythesea

you could reasonably assume that this choice exists for ANY shot?

The problem is parallax error: the apparent difference when an object is viewed along two lines of sight. This is eliminated with SLR camera designs. To see what the lens sees you will need to frame the shot using the LCD.

RichBrew

Dillybythesea · #10 (**permalink**) 12-09-2009, 08:19 AM

Thank you RichBrew. I can picture the problem now you explain it. But I think they shouldn't promote the camera as offering the choice, if the OVF isn't usable because of parallux error. (Harrumph!) We live and learn.