Which Canon DSLR works best for manually-focused EF lenses through the optical viewfinder?

[jasonrohrer]

I have some high-quality manually-focus Canon Cine EF lenses. They have digital contacts on the back (so they relay information to the camera), but they have no motors for focus or aperture.

I'm also a manual-focus shooter generally, going back to my film days, when the microprism at the center of the optical viewfinder worked great for me. In fact, I don't think I've ever shot an auto-focused photo in my life that I can recall, at least not one that I actually used for anything (I've of course tested autofocus before). I'm funny that way.

But as I'm reading about various Canon DSLRs, I'm seeing that they have varying support for manual focus through the OVF.

First, many of the modern ones don't have swappable focusing screens, and you can't see the true depth-of-field for your lens at large apertures (the extra bright default focusing screens eliminate off-angle light). In the 5D line, you have to go back to the Mark II to swap in a true-matte screen that lets you see the true DOF. And this matte screen is readily available still. If you go into the 1D line, up to the 1Dx Mark II (but not Mark III), you get a whole range of possible focusing screens, including micro-prism and split-prism screens. But none of these seem to be available anywhere.

Then there's the issue of whether the AF points could be used easily to confirm sharp focus in manual mode.

Seems like this worked well in the 5D Mark II, but not the 5D Mark III and later, as described here:

Canon 5D Mark III Review

Maybe in the Mark II, as you focused back and forth, all 9 of the focus points would become active in turn as they each passed through being in focus.

Likewise on the 1D series---it seems like things got worse with the 1Dx, as described here:

Canon 1D X Review

Perhaps you could pick a point in the 1DS Mark III, and then that point would light up when it was in focus. But in the 1DX, the point itself doesn't light up, but instead some other light in the corner of the OVF lights up.

Of course, this could potentially be overcome in the 1DX and 1DX Mark II, if you could get micro- or split-prism focusing screens.

But even so, it seems like for manually focusing using AF points to confirm focus, the 5D Mark II might be the best of the bunch?

And I'm not even sure how helpful the AF points are for manual focus anyway. Perhaps they allow too much wiggle-room around a truly sharp focus.

But reading about these in manuals only gets me so far, and most reviewers don't spend a lot of time talking about this issue.

Does anyone have experience manually focusing with these different Canon DSLR models? Is there one that really stands out in terms of the best manual-focus experience?

(And no, I don't want to use the live view... the whole point of a DSLR, for me, is the optical viewfinder.)

 

[neuroanatomist]

I looked into this over a decade ago...I had used the Eg-S screen with my 5DII that I replaced with a 1D X. Not sure about the 1D X II, but for the 1D X there was no firmware support for the Ec-S matte screen. It may be that all you need to do is dial in some EC, but unlike prior models where you could specify the focus screen in the menus and it would automatically compensate for exposure metering, the 1D X did not do that.

Probably this isn't the solution you're looking for, but the R3 and other newer MILCs offer a DoF preview option for the EVF that does show the true DoF of even fast lenses.

 

[neuroanatomist]

An old thread on this:

Canon 1DX paired with Ec-S focussing screen

For folks using the 1DX along with the "unsupported" Ec-S high precision focusing screen, what sort of exposure compensation are you having to manually apply, since it's not supported by firmware? Canon states the following: Previous Ec-S, Ec-N and Ec-R screens: These are previous generation...

www.canonrumors.com

 

[jasonrohrer]

As strange as it sounds for 2023, the 5D Mark II is actually at the top of my list. Did you have a positive experience using the Eg-S screen with it? And do you recall the 9 AF points working like I described? Where as you focus, whatever of the 9 points is currently in focus lights up?

I've heard about the problems with the Ec-S screen in the 1dx, which is why I would try to seek out a (mythical?) split-prism screen if I went in that direction. Though going back to the 1ds Mark II, the Ec-S is supported.

With the 1dx, did you also notice annoyances with the AF point behavior in mf mode?

 

[Del Paso]

I once adapted my 5 D III and 5 D IV with an EG-S type screen I bought from a Hong Kong company I found via google.(It was a Canon original slightly modified).
Installation was quite easy, but absolute cleanliness required! 2 screws must be removed- magnetized screwdrived, so you don't drop them into the body...
Also needed: MFA afterwards with every lens (different thickness than original screen). In my case, 1/3 EV exposure adjustment was required.
OVF gets a bit darker, but focusing is facilitated, huge advantage for macros or longer teles.
Beware: loss of warranty garanteed!
PS: I know this is not what you want to hear, but an inexpensive EOS R is by far the better choice.

 

[neuroanatomist]

As strange as it sounds for 2023, the 5D Mark II is actually at the top of my list. Did you have a positive experience using the Eg-S screen with it? And do you recall the 9 AF points working like I described? Where as you focus, whatever of the 9 points is currently in focus lights up?

The Eg-S worked well on my 5DII, but I really didn't use AF confirmation.

With the 1dx, did you also notice annoyances with the AF point behavior in mf mode?

I typically used MF only with TS-E lenses on my 1D X, and that was almost always in Live View. Sorry, no help there.

Serious question – are you wedded to the idea of a DSLR and, if so, why? As you know, the stock focus screens limit you to about f/2.5, but even with the precision matte screen you also have to press the DoF preview button if you want to see the DoF of a faster lens at anything other than wide open. As mentioned, the DoF preview mode for the EVF shows the DoF changing as you stop down from wide open. But the manual focus aids on MILCs go way beyond just showing the true DoF 'live'. Focus guides and focus peaking make MF on a mirrorless camera much easier than on a DSLR, especially with a fast lens.

From Canon:

Focus Guide & MF Peaking: Making Manual Focus Easier

I was concerned about the switch from OVF to EVF myself. After getting the EOS R in 2019, the 1D X remained my primary camera until the R3 came out, though that was mainly due to overall performance and ergonomics and not the EVF. The R3's EVF is very nice. No, it's not an OVF. But then again, my goal in looking through a VF is not to see the world around me...for that, I'll use my eyes or if needed, a pair of binoculars (I recently bought the Canon 10x42 L's to go along with all my L lenses). My goal in looking through the VF is to take a picture. The WYSIWYG in an EVF, along with the additional information that can be displayed (e.g. the electronic level, as a far better implementation than the 'borrowing' the focus points in a DLSR VF), for me outweigh the better optics of an OVF. After using an EVF for a while, it looks 'normal' but retains the benefits of providing far more information, e.g. the focusing aids, a live display of focus distance, etc.

 

[jasonrohrer]

I have looked through some higher-end EVFs at the store.

I'm sure they actually "work better" than an OVF, in terms of getting better shots and exposures and even focus.

But... I'm also interested in the experience, and not just the end product, of photography.

Looking through the OVF of my Minolta SR-T 101, from the 1960s... it's just a magical experience. Looking down into a Rolleiflex is even more dreamy... almost like a magic lantern or something. I might be wrong about this, but perhaps the inspiration that the experience provides could impact the quality of the photographs produced in an intangible way.

I hear you on the DoF preview, but that's only an issue on lenses that have actuatable apertures. My Cine lense actually have full-manual apertures that the camera can't control in any way. I understand that this means the OVF view will be very dark if I close the lens down, and therefore that it won't work very well with such lenses generally (because the lens won't auto-stop-down when the shutter is released).... but I almost always shoot wide-open anyway.

My Minolta SR-T 101 has a DoF preview button, which trips the "aperture close down" lever on the lens. It does get unusably dark when you do this.... so for general aiming and focusing, you leave it wide open, and it stops down when you hit the shutter release.

 

[neuroanatomist]

But... I'm also interested in the experience, and not just the end product, of photography.

Understood. Personally, I have not found an EVF to detract from the experience for me, and I started with an Argus TLR with a waist-level VF. But like camera ergonomics, it's a very personal thing.

 

[jasonrohrer]

I started with an Argus TLR with a waist-level VF

But it was cool to look through, wasn't it?

I've actually never shot on a Rolleiflex or similar... but I have peeked through one.

I've also built my own room-sized pinhole camera on several occasions, and everyone who enters it has their jaw on the floor. Looking through a high-quality OVF, for me, has a bit of that feeling for me. It's irrational, I know....

 

[neuroanatomist]

But it was cool to look through, wasn't it?

Yeah, but the 'pop' of the flashbulbs was cooler. But I was young then...

 

[Sporgon]

As strange as it sounds for 2023, the 5D Mark II is actually at the top of my list. Did you have a positive experience using the Eg-S screen with it? And do you recall the 9 AF points working like I described? Where as you focus, whatever of the 9 points is currently in focus lights up?

I've heard about the problems with the Ec-S screen in the 1dx, which is why I would try to seek out a (mythical?) split-prism screen if I went in that direction. Though going back to the 1ds Mark II, the Ec-S is supported.

With the 1dx, did you also notice annoyances with the AF point behavior in mf mode?

Personally I'd go for the 6D rather than the 5DII, unless you really need the 1/8000th top shutter speed. They both take the same screen - EG-S.
Regarding your later post about how good the Minolta is; yes, unfortunately OVFs have become corrupted over the years with translucent mirrors for AF control and translucent LCD displays overlaying the screen, which all detract from that crispness of those old SLRS. I think the high point for SLR viewfinders was in the late '70s, early '80s, with the likes of the Olympus OM1/2, Pentax ME/MX, Nikon FM/FE etc. Not sure about the likes of the Canon AE-1; I couldn't stand the things back in the day ! (Perhaps erroneously).
That's one of the reasons why I'm not overly disturbed by the transition to EVF, although to date I'm sticking with my 5DS cameras.
One very important point: don't go into the EG-S screens thinking that the AF confirmation will give you accurate focus when shooting fast lenses wide open; it won't. The latitude in that AF confirmation is way greater than the real point of focus.

 

[neuroanatomist]

...unfortunately OVFs have become corrupted over the years with translucent mirrors for AF control and translucent LCD displays overlaying the screen, which all detract from that crispness of those old SLRS.

Good point. Pull the battery out of a 7D, 1D X or later camera with a transmissive LCD for the AF points in the OVF, and the view gets really dark.

One meaningful advantage of an OVF is for those birders who want to use a long lens on a camera as a spotting scope. Try that with an EVF, and you'll need a backpack full of batteries.

 

[koenkooi]

Good point. Pull the battery out of a 7D, 1D X or later camera with a transmissive LCD for the AF points in the OVF, and the view gets really dark.

One meaningful advantage of an OVF is for those birders who want to use a long lens on a camera as a spotting scope. Try that with an EVF, and you'll need a backpack full of batteries.

If you’re static, a USB-C PD powerbank is another thing to consider.

 

[Sporgon]

Good point. Pull the battery out of a 7D, 1D X or later camera with a transmissive LCD for the AF points in the OVF, and the view gets really dark.

One meaningful advantage of an OVF is for those birders who want to use a long lens on a camera as a spotting scope. Try that with an EVF, and you'll need a backpack full of batteries.

Yes the transmissive LCD may be the reason why the EG-S screens are a somewhat disappointing experience where accurate focusing is concerned with fast lenses. Certainly the mirrorless with their focus peaking and ability to magnify the image within the viewfinder makes the use of manual lenses an easier and more satisfying experience.

 

[neuroanatomist]

If you’re static, a USB-C PD powerbank is another thing to consider.

That applies to the some bodies only. With my R3, the battery can be charged in the camera but the camera cannot be powered by USB-C.

 

[jasonrohrer]

Personally I'd go for the 6D rather than the 5DII, unless you really need the 1/8000th top shutter speed. They both take the same screen - EG-S.

I wasn't aware of the top-shutter speed difference, but I see that now. Isn't the 6D also lighter, more plastic, and less robust?

Also, I'm assuming that like the 5D Mark III, the AF points are black/LCD in the 6D, vs the red in the 5DII. But maybe I'm wrong about this?

Regarding your later post about how good the Minolta is; yes, unfortunately OVFs have become corrupted over the years with translucent mirrors for AF control and translucent LCD displays overlaying the screen, which all detract from that crispness of those old SLRS.

Do you know when this cross-over happened? I'm assuming the transmissive mirror allows for full-sensor autofocus for face-tracking, etc? I.e., it's a "half live view" kinda deal, where you can still see through the OVF, but the sensor still gets some light.

So for the older cameras without face tracking, they have solid mirrors? But where was the cut-off? I feel like a translucent mirror is something that I want to avoid.

And for the translucent LCD displays... do the ones with red illuminated AF points NOT have translucent LCDs overlaying?

One very important point: don't go into the EG-S screens thinking that the AF confirmation will give you accurate focus when shooting fast lenses wide open; it won't. The latitude in that AF confirmation is way greater than the real point of focus.

Excellent thing to keep in mind. So it seems like the AF system doesn't matter as much... assuming that it gets out of my way as much as possible (maybe avoiding LCD-based systems if I can). And I have my doubts about accurate manual focusing with an EG-S in all situations... which is why the models that support split-prism screens are so attractive to me.

 

[jasonrohrer]

Good point. Pull the battery out of a 7D, 1D X or later camera with a transmissive LCD for the AF points in the OVF, and the view gets really dark.

Whoa.... what???

This is because the LCD kinda goes into "limp" mode with no power, becoming semi-dark? It's not because the OVF has some kind of light-boost wizardry, is it?

Which models can I look at to avoid this? Original 6d? 5D Mark II? 1DS Mark III?

 

[jasonrohrer]

One quick data-point... the only DSLR in our house currently is my son's cheapie Nikon D3500. The OVF does not get darker when the battery is taken out. But the AF points glow bright red (only momentarily) when activated.

 

[jasonrohrer]

Here's a demo of the 5D3 OVF getting darker/dimmer when the battery is removed:

 

[neuroanatomist]

Isn't the 6D also lighter, more plastic, and less robust?

Yes.

Also, I'm assuming that like the 5D Mark III, the AF points are black/LCD in the 6D, vs the red in the 5DII. But maybe I'm wrong about this?
And for the translucent LCD displays... do the ones with red illuminated AF points NOT have translucent LCDs overlaying?

IIRC (could be wrong), the 6D has the ‘traditional’ etched AF points.

The way to tell them apart is if you can see the AF points with the camera powered off, they are etched. If they disappear when you turn the camera off, there is a transmissive LCD in the viewfinder. Sounds like they’re etched in the D3500. The red glow is from little LEDs in the VF projecting onto the raised etching.

The 5DII is etched, 5DIII has a transmissive LCD. 1D X has a transmissive LCD, prior 1-series are etched. Note that transmissive LCDs can still have red LEDs shine on the points, the 1D X does that.

The reason the transmissive LCD gets dark with the battery pulled is that it needs power to keep the liquid crystals aligned in such a way that the panel is transparent. There’s no added brightness.

Do you know when this cross-over happened? I'm assuming the transmissive mirror allows for full-sensor autofocus for face-tracking, etc? I.e., it's a "half live view" kinda deal, where you can still see through the OVF, but the sensor still gets some light.
So for the older cameras without face tracking, they have solid mirrors? But where was the cut-off? I feel like a translucent mirror is something that I want to avoid.

Not quite. All modern phase AF systems (i.e., in every DSLR) use a semi-transparent main mirror that reflects ~75% of the light up to the viewfinder and passes ~25% of the light through to the secondary mirror where it’s reflected down to the AF sensor.

The ‘face detection’ in DSLRs doesn’t use the image sensor (MILCs have face recognition, which works very well, and can even be trained to prioritize specific faces). With the mirror down in a DSLR, zero light reaches the image sensor. The face detection in DSLRs uses the metering sensor, and was made possible by newer metering sensors with two-color detection and more zones.