Benefits of optical viewfinder vs electronic viewfinder

We had a discussion about this earlier about this and of course discussions get very interesting with older shooters who just seem to have a difficult time with the idea that the market is slowing moving towards mirrorless.  

IMO, I think the ability to see your exposure as it's happening is a big win for the electronic viewfinder vs having to chimp 24/7 with optical.  

Where do you stand on this?  

You mean chimp in the eyepiece?

Um, no. That's way too small.

garyrhook wrote: You mean chimp in the eyepiece?

Um, no. That's way too small.

Not what was meant. Meant you have to chimp to see the exposure with an OVF while it's WYSIWYG with an EVF.

The main benefit of an OVF is lack of viewfinder lag when shooting action. This is being addressed in newer mirrorless cameras so that benefit will eventually not exist anymore.  

I can photograph the sun and i dont have to try to blink with the shutter! 

Shadowfixer1 wrote:

garyrhook wrote: You mean chimp in the eyepiece?

Um, no. That's way too small.

Not what was meant. Meant you have to chimp to see the exposure with an OVF while it's WYSIWYG with an EVF.

The main benefit of an OVF is lack of viewfinder lag when shooting action. This is being addressed in newer mirrorless cameras so that benefit will eventually not exist anymore.  

Apparently one or two of the new systems just released has such bad lag one must throttle it back to 6 FPS to be useable. Is this something in the software or is it linked to hardware? I’m not sure we’re as close to being out of the woods with that as we originally realized if it involves hardware. 

The a9 is probably the closest camera you can get to a DSLR atm, but the price tag for that performance is pretty steep 

Shadowfixer1 wrote:

garyrhook wrote: You mean chimp in the eyepiece?

Not what was meant. Meant you have to chimp to see the exposure with an OVF while it's WYSIWYG with an EVF.

Ah. No, didn't get that. Still don't see it as a critical issue, but maybe I'm the only person that reads the scene, checks the meter, takes test shots. Sure, in wide dynamic range situations you avoid a shot or two, but for me, not critical.

The only feature (I think that) I would really like in an EVF is focus peaking for manual focus. At least at this moment.

G'day Zach

I've been using EVFs now for about 15 yrs - since my first superzoom 10x zoom Fuji. Swapping from film SLRs to EVF was a hellova fright, as the EVF was quite poor by today's standards, but I had to put my trust in that resulting image would be okay - and it was

These days using Panasonic bodies, the EVF is just magic - no doubts, no arguments

Being electronic they do have some wiley features - the self-brightening and darkening following the actual scene brightness works a treat 99% of the time. When using a CPL-pola filter, as the filter darkens the sky, the EVF compensates- a bit of a bugga!. So to overcome this, on my CPL I have stuck the alphabet at 1cm spacing around the filter, I rotate by hand to ascertain the precise result and after mounting to the lens, reset the alpha letter to TDC and take the photo.

Insofar as 'losing' the EVF during continuous / burst - it's not an issue. The FZ-200 does 5,5fps with full AF-C mode and full EVF operation. The FZ-2500 does 7fps with the same modes in use. If I need faster fps, then two things happen - yes I can choose 20 or 40 or 60fps using the electronic shutter and I do not get 'live' EVF. How often do I need up to 60fps - never used it. How many 'consumer-level' dSLRs get over 5,5fps with full AF-C - not all that many

Bottom line - the difference between OVF and EVF is about as significant as film to digital shooting. The biggest drawback to EVF popularity is traditional dSLR users who are scared to take the leap into the 'new world'.

Hope this helps
Phil from the great land Downunder
www.flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/

Ozzie_Traveller wrote: The biggest drawback to EVF popularity is traditional dSLR users who are scared to take the leap into the 'new world'.

Call me chicken but with 4 bodies, 16 lenses, and decades
making a living with the SLR/DSLR, I see no point in EVF.

G'day NS

I would never call you 'chicken' ....... maybe quack-quack from all those excellent bird shots you come up with tho

Phil

Ozzie_Traveller wrote: …maybe quack-quack …

Btw, I'm waiting for the delivery of both the DK-17M and the DK-19
to keep my nose away from certain controls… left eye shooter!

G'day Zach + others

Just a follow up from the earlier post one of the things I like with the EVF is being able to alter the display via a simple touch-of-a-button from "nil stuff" to "heaps of stuff"

Here's some samples [shots of the LCD screen so some pixellation will be visible]
a) No VF information beyond the focus point (which can be enlarged or reduced via setup menu)

b) Basic exposure information only

c) Maximum incl camera settings information

Max mode shows (clockwise from top left)
Shooting mode, JPG colour mode selected, flash status; movie status available, picture format & pixel size [L-M-S options]; JPG saving quality, AF-mode, focus-point style, continuous burst mode, battery status, histogram, exposures remaining on card, WB, EV +/- selected, S/speed, Aperture, metering mode (centre weighted)

Hope this helps
Phil from the great land Downunder
www.flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/

A student ask me:
"Is it a must to have sophisticated cameras to get good
shots? Why can't it be done with a point and shoot?"

I replied:
"Given shots are extremely difficult in a way or another. It
makes sense to have a camera that has features to make
possible these captures so a given level of sophistication
is required.

Even more sophistication is needed when time is the chal-
lenge either in execution or in reaction. That sophistication
level will get you a tool that behaves like a point and shoot."

This, Phil, makes all that stuff in the EVF totally irrelevant
as there is no time to ponder on a control panel but should
concentrate on the subject.

Troponin wrote: I can photograph the sun and i dont have to try to blink with the shutter! 

I might be somewhat new here and not sure if you are joking or not.  But won't that fry your sensor?  

G'day Ken

Sensor damage - different from EVF / OVF issues, but 'no' shooting directly into the sun does not seem to be an issue. What -is- known to kill sensors is the laser lights seen in discos and rock concerts .... there have been many reports of a dead camera after one of these beams swishes across the sensosr

Phil

Ken Brun wrote:

Troponin wrote: I can photograph the sun and i dont have to try to blink with the shutter! 

I might be somewhat new here and not sure if you are joking or not.  But won't that fry your sensor?  

Well, my comment was a bit silly, and I'm not really sure it even made complete sense. hehe 

With faster shutter speeds, it's not an issue. I don't make a practice of it, and my shutter speeds are in the 1/1000+ range if I do get a flash of sun. It's the times your sensor is more vunerable you should be aware of, like when trying to get a video of an eclipse. or accidentally taking a 5 second exposure because you forgot to change your shutter speed from the last landscape you took!