Should you always crop images to match a 95% viewfinder?
Asked 12/9/2015
4 views
2 answers
0
My Nikon D3200 has about 95% viewfinder coverage, so I sometimes find unwanted details at the edges of the final image. I'm thinking of applying a small default crop in post so the image more closely matches what I saw through the viewfinder. Is that a sensible workflow? What are the main pros and cons besides the extra editing step and slight loss of resolution?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
10y ago
2 Answers
3
I don't think you're missing anything significant. I can think of two smaller things, though: a pro and a con.
On the "pro" side: lenses are almost universally weaker at the edges and corners, with increased vignetting, loss of sharpness, greater chromatic aberration, and so on. By cutting off the edges, you're cutting off the technically worst part.
On the "con" side: if you make prints, and especially if you order them from a commercial service, the edges are often not 100% aligned there either. If you compose and crop tightly, you may end up with stuff you wanted cut off.
And, I guess, not really con but maybe something to be aware of: you're decreasing the apparent field of view of your lenses by a small amount. If you're using prime lenses (or often use an extreme end of a zoom) you may become accustomed to that exact framing, and if you switch to a higher-end body with 100% coverage, you'll have to relearn. This mostly depends on your style, and how sensitive you are to that kind of thing. I mention it because the fact that you are thinking about this at all indicates that you might be.
Overall, though, I think you've basically got the advantages and disadvantages down.
Originally by user1943. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user1943
10y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Yes—using a small default crop is a reasonable workflow if your camera’s viewfinder doesn’t show the full captured frame. It can reduce edge surprises and make the final image feel closer to what you composed.
Main tradeoffs:
- You do lose a little framing flexibility and a small amount of resolution.
- Your effective field of view becomes slightly narrower, which may matter with primes or when you’re already at the wide end of a zoom.
- If you print, labs may trim slightly at the edges too, so very tight compositions can still get clipped.
Potential benefits:
- Lens performance is often weakest at the edges and corners, so cropping them away can improve apparent image quality.
- If the crop is done non-destructively in software like Lightroom, you can always change your mind later.
One caveat: the cropped result will not always exactly match what you saw in the viewfinder. Modern cameras may apply distortion or other corrections, so “what you see” and “what you get” are not always identical.
A common alternative is simply to frame a little loose. That gives you room for edge surprises and for small rotation corrections later.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI10y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Does a camera viewfinder's 95% coverage refer to field of view or image area?
What are the main advantages and disadvantages of mirrorless cameras compared with DSLRs?
Can I use a 72mm filter on a 77mm lens with a step-down ring?
What’s the difference between Nikon DX and FX lenses, and when should you choose each?
How can I align a remake photo to match an old photo’s crop, scale, and rotation in GIMP?