EVF

[BernardLanguillier]

team,

I keep reading praise about the latest generation of EVFs, so I tried those from Sony (a7rII and 6300), Olympus (Pen-F) and Fuji (x-T1 I guess) and... I don't know what to say...

In my book the shooting experience remains just awful compared to that of a good OVF.

Yes, it is usable, but I am at a loss why so many folks are willing to go for those with their current specs.

I must getting old real quick.

Cheers,
Bernard

[AlterEgo]

...

for example I do not aim for any fast action or remote objects/wildlife with long teles = I just frame and evaluate exposure with EVF (hand held operation)... as for the colors or the scene in general I prefer to see that with my own eyes, not distorted by any VF (no action - no danger to miss the moment)... plus I am not willing to forego EFCS (hand held operation) for a good chance of shutter shock & mirror slap in the range of exposure times that I use often or forego better sensor saturation to move out that time zone...

[Hulyss]

team,

I keep reading praise about the latest generation of EVFs, so I tried those from Sony (a7rII and 6300), Olympus (Pen-F) and Fuji (x-T1 I guess) and... I don't know what to say...

In my book the shooting experience remains just awful compared to that of a good OVF.

Yes, it is usable, but I am at a loss why so many folks are willing to go for those with their current specs.

I must getting old real quick.

Cheers,
Bernard

It is awefull. The SL evf is tad better but I can't imagine real OVF dying anytime soon. Anyway, technogearheads will always have the last word on forums because forums are their main occupation. For me, my Nikon dslrs are the pinnacle of shooting exprience. (Should be the same for canon/pentax shooters).

PS: I'm far to be old ^^ and say that.

[Hywel]

My two work-horse cameras are Hasselblad H3D31ii and Sony A7Rii.

Yes, the optical viewfinder on the Hasselblad is better in brightly-lit situations. Outdoors in the sunshine or in the studio with bright modelling lights it yet to be beaten.

But shooting star trails, any manual focus situation, or shooting in a dim studio (eg lit by flash, but where the modelling lights are non-existant) I find the EVF better.

It's not as detailed or as responsive, but it is certainly brighter, provides a magnified view for focussing, zebras for exposure, peaking, etc..

And there's PLENTY of scope for improving EVFs in future generations of tech. The optical viewfinder is never going to improve much, after more than a century of work it is now constrained by the physics. A f/2.8 lens on the Hasselblad gives as bright a viewfinder image as it gives. An f/2.8 lens on the Sony can have the amplification turned up so you can almost see in the dark.

No mirror to slap, electronic first curtain to remove shutter shock, and even better what-you-see-is-what-you-get than a SLR.

I'm starting to prefer the EVF, on balance. Not that it's perfect. God knows it could do with higher resolution and higher refresh rate. But that'll come.

Cheers, Hywel

[rdonson]

I have Canon DSLRs and lenses and a Fuji X-T1 and lenses.  Honestly, I don't miss the OVF when I use the Fuji.  There are many good things about the EVF in the Fuji.

- exposure preview
- set it up to shoot RAW and JPEG and use a B&W setting for the JPEG and see B&W in the EVF - talk about previsualization!
- I love low light and nighttime photography - the EVF excels here
- I don't have to use mirror lockup to reduce mirror slap vibration for landscape shots

Are EVFs perfect?  Hell no.
 
Will they get better?  For sure.  We're already seeing higher res EVFs and MUCH faster refresh rates. 

Will OVFs disappear?  Unlikely. 

Heck I have friends who still use 8x10 view cameras and film.  SLRs didn't drive view cameras into oblivion and EVFs won't make OVFs go away.

[Herbc]

Being 80 this year, and having poor vision in one eye, EVF is a boon.  I grew up with LF, my first camera was a speed graphic, etc etc.  EVF is better for me than OVF, but that is because the brightness of it stays pretty much under control.  I can see where OVF is a better choice for fast moving or quick shooting, but for landscapes, it really helps me.

[Telecaster]

For me EVFs are Da Bomb. The purpose of a camera ultimately isn't to relish the glorious view through one's direct VF (rangefinders) or mirror/pentaprism system. It's to take photos. IMO EVFs give you an abstracted view closer to that of photographs than RF or SLR cameras. And this is without even considering benefits like in-finder magnification & manual focusing precision along with low-light amplification. For me it's a wipe the floor level EVF rout.

-Dave-

[JV]

Personally I wouldn't miss OVFs at all...  That being said, the one from the Leica S is pretty amazing...

[Guillermo Luijk]

OVF's are generally (low light would be a case when they're not) better for evaluating the scene. EVF's are always better for evaluating capture (exposure, focus, white balance).

It depends on how well you feel at evaluating the scene on a EVF, and how well you feel at evaluating the capture on a OVF that you'll prefer one to the other.

An absolute truth is that EVF's are improving at evaluating scenes, while OVF's are not improving at evaluating capture. This means there will eventually come a day for everyone when EVF's will be preferred. This happened to me with the second generation of EVF's (around 3 years ago).

Exposure OVF vs EVF:


Low light using EVF (OVF was useless):


Regards

Enviado desde mi GT-I9195 mediante Tapatalk

[David Sutton]

I'm a big fan of EVF and my shooting companion hates them. But we don't hesitate to use either.
One thing I've recently noticed is I can frame and autofocus the X-T1 with a 12 stop ND filter attached. The downside is it's a variable, and because the viewfinder doesn't go dark I can't tell which way I'm rotating it without coming round the front of the lens and looking at it.

[scooby70]

In my book the shooting experience remains just awful compared to that of a good OVF.

I wonder what percentage of cameras in use have a good OVF?

Personally and for me EVF's are the way forward. I see the advantages for me and I'd only go back with a gun to my head.

[chez]

I wonder what percentage of cameras in use have a good OVF?

Personally and for me EVF's are the way forward. I see the advantages for me and I'd only go back with a gun to my head.

I found OVF to degrade during the digital everything AF age. Look at the beautiful bright viewfinder of the old Olympus cameras and compare to today's dark tunnels.

I love EVF for overall image evaluation and focusing...they are miles ahead of the OVF in these aspects. Trying to nail manual focus with an OVF is a pain...turns into a pleasure with EVF.

[scooby70]

I found OVF to degrade during the digital everything AF age. Look at the beautiful bright viewfinder of the old Olympus cameras and compare to today's dark tunnels.

I love EVF for overall image evaluation and focusing...they are miles ahead of the OVF in these aspects. Trying to nail manual focus with an OVF is a pain...turns into a pleasure with EVF.

I think the best OVF I ever had was not on a film camera but on my 5D but one thing that annoyed me just about every single time I used it was the crud I could see through it, not easily cleanable either.

[John Camp]

I have both a D800 and a Panasonic GX8 (two bodies) and I hardly ever use the D800 anymore. I mostly shoot street or "opportunistic" photos, where you're out cruising around and see something you want to shoot. (Could even be a sunset.) I look at it with my eyes, which are better than an optical viewfinder, and then I just use the EVF to frame it. I'm not really doing much evaluation through the viewfinder itself, and I don't using an OVF either. The viewfinders on the GX8s are pretty good, not really what you'd call tunnel vision. Ymmv.

[David Anderson]

- exposure preview
- set it up to shoot RAW and JPEG and use a B&W setting for the JPEG and see B&W in the EVF - talk about previsualization!
- I love low light and nighttime photography - the EVF excels here
- I don't have to use mirror lockup to reduce mirror slap vibration for landscape shots

I'm currently reviewing a Fuji for my blog - it's my first shooting experience with EVF's - and would agree with you 100% about the benefits.
No, definitely not perfect, but then neither is an OVF.

Shooting in B&W with he EVF set to preview the exposure is a real eye opener and great fun and I also find the focus aids very useful.

[BJL]

. . . In my book the shooting experience remains just awful compared to that of a good OVF.

To make this more than a troll post to stir up EVF fanboys, can you specify the disadvantages that you experienced with these EVFs, and in comparison to which OVFs?

[jhemp]

I first went EVF when the Sony A99 came out.  Before that I was shooting a Sony a900, Mamiya 7II and a Toyo 4x5.  I almost returned the camera after a week of use because I didn't like the EVF.  But I gave it another week and fell in love with the EVF.  I don't think I could ever go back to a OVF!
Jay

[Robert Roaldi]

I have both a D800 and a Panasonic GX8 (two bodies) and I hardly ever use the D800 anymore. I mostly shoot street or "opportunistic" photos, where you're out cruising around and see something you want to shoot. (Could even be a sunset.) I look at it with my eyes, which are better than an optical viewfinder, and then I just use the EVF to frame it. I'm not really doing much evaluation through the viewfinder itself, and I don't using an OVF either. The viewfinders on the GX8s are pretty good, not really what you'd call tunnel vision. Ymmv.

I agree with this. For example, I've never understood the worries about colour rendition of EVFs vs OVFs. The only colour that matters to me is what is in the image file. If the EVF or OVF biases the colour, can't you just look at the scene with your naked eye. To me, the viewfinder is for framing, and it could be B&W for all I care. Obviously, many other people work differently.

Also, an EVF should be an easy way for all cameras to have 100% viewfinder coverage, but I have an old camcorder whose coverage is only about 85% when used in stills mode. What a bizarre design choice, I've always thought.

[BernardLanguillier]

To make this more than a troll post to stir up EVF fanboys, can you specify the disadvantages that you experienced with these EVFs, and in comparison to which OVFs?

I am fully aware of the advantages of EVFs, that is not the point.

I just hate looking at the world through them, that's what I mean by shooting experience.

There is no doubt that OVF are a dying breed, but I just feel that way too many photographers give the current generation a pass on the shooting experience aspect in exchange for the value they deliver. Considering that there will soon be no alternative, I am just hoping to see photographers demand a little bit more from our hardware providers. I haven't had the chance to shoot with a Leica SL, I hear it is better.

This post shouldn't be read as saying "my OVF is better than your EVF", it says "my future EVF isn't good enough and I am sad about this".

The OVFs I compare them too are D810, D750 and D5 very recently.

Cheers,
Bernard

[pegelli]

I agree the world looks "better" through an OVF, and this is no surprise because it's almost like looking to the world without a camera in front of your face (which is even better  )

But for taking a photograph an EVF can do some things an OVF can't and vice versa. But for manual focus (which I do a lot of) an EVF with magnified view I think is superior to even the best OVF. On the other hand for fast action shooting an OVF can't be beat. That's why I have (and still use) both.

For me current EVF's are good enough to not have to feel the same sadness you do, but like you I like to see them getting better over time.