Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: jbgeach on October 08, 2012, 10:39:57 am
-
Michael
Thank you for your A99 review.
I learned photography on film and then transitioned to digital photography. I share your love for a big bright viewfinder.
However, you have missed the biggest advantage of the EVF for me. What you see is what you get (WYSIWYG).
After shooting the NEX-7 for one year, I recently picked up my 5d and as I was shooting it, I felt that the exposure compensation was broken. It wasn't it was just that after getting used to a preview with the exposure, white balance and settings previewed, I had to return to chimping.
Maybe this isn't a problem for you as you are clearly an excellent photographer who prefers a more methodical type of photography, but for me, the EVF helps me cut down on chimping and have more keepers
Jonathan Geach
-
What you see is what you get (WYSIWYG).
I am getting raw files and certain important parameters are nowhere to be found in EVF.
-
The advantages of the EVF are mostly person specific. I have used SLRs with optical viewfinders for years starting in 1970 but strangely I like a good EVF. (Olympus OMD and the Panasonic GH2) There are significant limitations but they don't bother my style of shooting but I can well see that many others would not like them at all.
It will be interesting to see how this Sony does.
Dave S
-
I have found that by having an EVF I am able to shoot jpg much more often as I rarely have to make major changes in post. It really saves a lot of time getting it right the first time
-
Yeah, while OVFs certainly still have advantages, I'm not sure how Nick Devlin doesn't see at least some advantage to EVFs. Since I started shooting EVFs, it's amazing to go through my Lightroom catalogue and see how much more consistent my exposures are, because WYSIWYG. Also, manual focusing, with both peaking and magnification, is much better than even my A900 with a matte screen.
-
The biggest advantage, to me, is the SLT cameras give the possibility of handheld landscape photography. No mirror slap, and electronic first curtain shutter. These make a huge difference to platform stability (along with sensor-based stabilization, of course!).
I wouldn't consider going back(wards) to an OVF camera. . .
-
I can see advantages to the EVF model, just not with the present EVFs. If Sony had really raised the bar on EVF technology and put a stunning finder in the A99, that would have been really exciting. What we got was rewarmed mediocrity.
I shot with the EOS RT back in the day and there were some things it did well that a modern EVF could mirror (pun intended). But the degradation of colour and tonal relationships which I see with present-day EVFs make them an inherently major compromise.
As for mirror-slap, I've become resigned to 3x focal length, with a minimum of 1/125th being the new rule for handheld shooting on the D800E. Not sure how much image-degrading vibration really comes from the mirror these days versus other sources - be interesting to know.
And nobody seems to talk about the image degradation caused by the pellicle mirror. It's minor, but less than an AA filter?
All in all, it's a question of taste. If you like'em, use'em. If EVFs got a lot better, we'd all be using them, but presently its not a compromise I care to make.
Cheers,
- N.
-
I can see advantages to the EVF model, just not with the present EVFs. If Sony had really raised the bar on EVF technology and put a stunning finder in the A99, that would have been really exciting. What we got was rewarmed mediocrity.
I shot with the EOS RT back in the day and there were some things it did well that a modern EVF could mirror (pun intended). But the degradation of colour and tonal relationships which I see with present-day EVFs make them an inherently major compromise.
EVFs are very useful for composition and focusing and DOF determination, and they work well for those purposes. The view isn't as pleasing in some ways as an OVF.
As for mirror-slap, I've become resigned to 3x focal length, with a minimum of 1/125th being the new rule for handheld shooting on the D800E. Not sure how much image-degrading vibration really comes from the mirror these days versus other sources - be interesting to know.
The tests I have seen have shown very significant degradation both from the mirror and the physical first curtain shutter.
Here is just one example of MLU making a huge difference:
http://stinsonphotography.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/mirror-lock-up.jpg
And here is an example of electronic first curtain shutter making a substantial difference:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/39763467
And nobody seems to talk about the image degradation caused by the pellicle mirror. It's minor, but less than an AA filter?
I have seen no evidence of any image degradation caused by the second/third generation SLT mirrors. The first gen (Alpha 33/55) had some very slight blurring and also "ghosting" artifacts with extreme bright hotspots, but Sony has improved the design since then. The image degradation caused by mirror slap and shutter slap can be very visible and noticeable. I fully expect the Sony Alpha 36MP FF camera expected next year to significantly outperform the Nikon D800 in day to day usage for handheld photography since it will be a much more stable platform.
-
Hi,
I was testing with 200/2.8 on tripod. Not using MLU cut resolution in half. I could achieve the same sharpness shooting free hand at 1/15 - 1/125 using AntiShake as on tripod with MLU. AntiShake did not help on tripod.
So, without MLU my best result was around 3MP and with MLU it was around 12MP.
Interestingly enough, all images looked decently sharp, until I measured MTF with Imatest. After seeing the Imatest results I could see the differences at actual pixels on the screen.
I don't know which camera I used, it was probably my Alpha 700.
So now, I'm quite religious about using MLU whenever camera is on tripod. Never ever use AS with camera on tripod and MLU. It will destruct image quality.
Best regards
Erik
I can see advantages to the EVF model, just not with the present EVFs. If Sony had really raised the bar on EVF technology and put a stunning finder in the A99, that would have been really exciting. What we got was rewarmed mediocrity.
I shot with the EOS RT back in the day and there were some things it did well that a modern EVF could mirror (pun intended). But the degradation of colour and tonal relationships which I see with present-day EVFs make them an inherently major compromise.
As for mirror-slap, I've become resigned to 3x focal length, with a minimum of 1/125th being the new rule for handheld shooting on the D800E. Not sure how much image-degrading vibration really comes from the mirror these days versus other sources - be interesting to know.
And nobody seems to talk about the image degradation caused by the pellicle mirror. It's minor, but less than an AA filter?
All in all, it's a question of taste. If you like'em, use'em. If EVFs got a lot better, we'd all be using them, but presently its not a compromise I care to make.
Cheers,
- N.
-
But the degradation of colour and tonal relationships which I see with present-day EVFs make them an inherently major compromise.
how does that make your shot worse though ?
-
how does that make your shot worse though ?
That's the bottom line for me. EVF and what it makes possible (no mirror slap, ever) trumps looking through the optical VF in my book. YMMV.
-
So now, I'm quite religious about using MLU whenever camera is on tripod. Never ever use AS with camera on tripod and MLU. It will destruct image quality.
When using a tripod in windy conditions, I've found that enabling image stabilisation on my lenses helps when the shutter speed is slow.
-
how does that make your shot worse though ?
Because, for me at least, my relationship to the scene I am trying to photograph is deeply influenced by the visual quality of what I see through the finder. My emotional creative instinct just doesn't fire when what I see through the finder/ground glass is uninspiring.
Also, I find EVFs very difficult to use to judge colour and DR. This is obviously personal and others obviously feel there are able to work with/relate to the image through an EVF just fine.
But notwithstanding that, I am quite sure that the number of photographers who will actively prefer the A99 to its rivals is a small percentage.
Both Michael and I really looked forward to using the A99 - in particular Michael who has a significant investment in Sony lenses - but both of us had an identical, instant and somewhat surprising response...we really disliked the experience of looking through the A99's finder.
- N.
-
Because, for me at least, my relationship to the scene I am trying to photograph is deeply influenced by the visual quality of what I see through the finder. My emotional creative instinct just doesn't fire when what I see through the finder/ground glass is uninspiring.
I see... that is what I never could understand myself because I subjectively prefer to see the scene unaltered w/ anything and viewfinder is only for framing... more so because I know that the scene is not going to look exactly as I see it - it will be postprocessed and hence no viewfinder is going to reflect that... so on top of EVF I can happily leave w/ the green cast of UniWB.
Also, I find EVFs very difficult to use to judge colour and DR.
well - camera's spotmeter can help to judge the DR... more so if there is no split prism making spotmetering impossible (or very difficult)... and some cameras (Olympus I'd say) can in fact get very close to realtime raw clipping indication in the picture presented in EVF w/ blinkies (not histogram - but right in the image)... not exactly unfortunately but very close... and well some lenses they have 1-2+ EV vignetting wide open - so does it not affect your judgement while evaluating a DR through OVF with the lens wide open - I can't believe that you will stop down the lens to the actual aperture if it is an autofocus/autoaperture lens and not fully manual to see if there is a change in the corner
-
According to a friend shooting with th 77, the EVF is a pain with PL filters since it tries to compensate for the brightness change which makes challnging to adjust polarization. Not sure if somebody else experienced that?
As far as OVF go, I personally find them a lot more enjoyabl to use also, but stitching has taught me that I don't need a viewfinder to compose.
I could probably live with a decent EVF, but it would definitely make photography less enjoyable. I do understnd that results are sometimes more important than enjoyment though and the Sony is for sure an intersting offering.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi personally I have mixed feelings. Sometimes I like EVF sometimes less so. I like to have live view focusing on the screen. Virtual horizon etc. Specially with picture effects on sometimes it is just to dark.
I'm shooting the old Alpha 900 and the Alpha 77 in parallell, and sometimes prefer one over the other.
Best regards
Erik
Because, for me at least, my relationship to the scene I am trying to photograph is deeply influenced by the visual quality of what I see through the finder. My emotional creative instinct just doesn't fire when what I see through the finder/ground glass is uninspiring.
Also, I find EVFs very difficult to use to judge colour and DR. This is obviously personal and others obviously feel there are able to work with/relate to the image through an EVF just fine.
But notwithstanding that, I am quite sure that the number of photographers who will actively prefer the A99 to its rivals is a small percentage.
Both Michael and I really looked forward to using the A99 - in particular Michael who has a significant investment in Sony lenses - but both of us had an identical, instant and somewhat surprising response...we really disliked the experience of looking through the A99's finder.
- N.
-
A lot of the advantages come from not having a mirror rather than the EVF itself, in many ways the EVF is just a consequence of this.
A good area to look at EVF uses is video: focus peaking, false colour modes/zebraing etc. unfortunately stills camera manufacturers seem determined to ignore these even with the cameras with video capability.
-
According to a friend shooting with th 77, the EVF is a pain with PL filters since it tries to compensate for the brightness change which makes challnging to adjust polarization. Not sure if somebody else experienced that?
but that is not a genetic feature of EVF - it is just how particular firmware is working...
-
According to a friend shooting with th 77, the EVF is a pain with PL filters since it tries to compensate for the brightness change which makes challnging to adjust polarization. Not sure if somebody else experienced that?
Bernard, [Revised after I checked my camera's settings and tested a few things!]
Yes, I have occasionally had that problem with my EM5, caused by EVF auto-level adjustment (called "Live View Boost" on the EM5), along with the related problem that one does not get a preview of how luminosity levels are effected by exposure compensation or a histogram that reflects exposure compensation settings. But AFAIK, all these problems can be avoided by suppressing that auto-brightness adjustment, giving a more WYSIWYG display of brightness. On the EM5, this "Live View Boost" is on by default, but more experienced users will probably benefit by turning it of most of the time.
On the other hand, I am of the faction that uses the VF primarly for framing, manual focusing, and checking for appropriate exposure level (like avoiding blown highlights), so for me, the eye-level live preview given by an EVF wins over both OVFs and rear-screen live view for:
- the ability to do accurate manual focusing while using an eye-level VF, including the cases of focusing at an off-center point, and hand-held close-ups where focus and re-compose is impractical.
- live histograms and warnings of over-exposed and/or underexposed regions in the VF.
Of course, an SLR with accessory EVF could offer the best of both worlds, and seems appropriate for at least some high-end cameras, especially DSLRs intended for serious video usage. I wonder if and when Canon or Nikon will offer that, given that they seem to be the only two major camera makers still interested in making high-end DSLRs.
-
According to a friend shooting with th 77, the EVF is a pain with PL filters since it tries to compensate for the brightness change which makes challnging to adjust polarization. Not sure if somebody else experienced that?
With my GH2 I find that simply seeking the longest shutter speed in the EVF with filter rotation (in A-priority and unlocked metering) gives a fairly narrow "null" point.
Pete
-
According to a friend shooting with th 77, the EVF is a pain with PL filters since it tries to compensate for the brightness change which makes challnging to adjust polarization. Not sure if somebody else experienced that?
As far as OVF go, I personally find them a lot more enjoyabl to use also, but stitching has taught me that I don't need a viewfinder to compose.
I could probably live with a decent EVF, but it would definitely make photography less enjoyable. I do understnd that results are sometimes more important than enjoyment though and the Sony is for sure an intersting offering.
Cheers,
Bernard
Tell your friend to set "live view effect" to OFF. That should do the trick, I believe.
-
Ultimately, even with today's EVF tech, there are positives to both EVFs an OVFs, and I'd call it a wash. As an owner of the A900, NEX-7, and Fuji X100, I'd say I'm pretty familiar with all of the current viewfinder styles. While an OVF may be more enjoyable to look through, do a better job in high DR scenes, and is better for fast motion in daylight, EVFs give a more accurate portrayal of what you'll see on your computer screen (WYSIWYG,) are better in very low light, and are better at manual focusing.
I find the OVF in my A900 and the EVF in my NEX-7 equally useful, but in different ways. I'd have a hard time picking one over the other. All of that being said, the hybrid viewfinder in my X100 is probably my favorite to use, and I can't say enough about having the option of both in one camera (although the current EVF in the hybrid implementation is lower quality than I'd like.)
-
I go back and forth between a Nikon D800e and D3 on one side, and a Panasonic system with both a GX1 and GH2 on the other. I much prefer the Nikon viewfinder, but after reading this thread, I realized I don't know exactly why. When I shoot landscapes or more formal set-ups, I use the Nikon and spend most of my time looking at the scene with both eyes, and use the viewfinder almost exclusively for framing. When I shoot street, I use the Panasonic system with clip-on viewfinder on the G1x, because it's less obtrusive, but street is really where an OVF would help because you can pick up things faster. You do speed things up a little with practice, but, as in most things photographic, it always seems perfection lies just on the other side of the possible -- a really great 100% optical viewfinder on a camera the size of the G1x.
-
With regard to the A99 review and EVFs - top left for the EVF is only "nose-friendly" to right eye shooters. it's nearly a non starter for left eye shooters for reasons other than the nose :) or for anyone that has a non-correctable eyesight issue in the right eye.
-
...it always seems perfection lies just on the other side of the possible -- a really great 100% optical viewfinder on a camera the size of the G1x.
If you can deal with a fixed lens, the Fuji X100's viewfinder setup is wonderful. I use the optical viewfinder in everyday and street situations, and I use the EVF for more static things. It's a great combo. Of course, the X-Pro1 also offers this with interchangeable lenses, but the camera is larger (similar in size to the M9.)
-
With regard to the A99 review and EVFs - top left for the EVF is only "nose-friendly" to right eye shooters. it's nearly a non starter for left eye shooters for reasons other than the nose :) or for anyone that has a non-correctable eyesight issue in the right eye.
I don't really think so. A viewfinder in the center of the camera causes issues for both left and right eyed shooters. A viewfinder on the top left saves right eyed shooters, but left eyed shooters unfortunately have to deal with LCD smudges and nose interference in both viewfinder locations...unless someone somehow makes a viewfinder on the right side of the camera. :D
-
I don't really think so. A viewfinder in the center of the camera causes issues for both left and right eyed shooters. A viewfinder on the top left saves right eyed shooters, but left eyed shooters unfortunately have to deal with LCD smudges and nose interference in both viewfinder locations...unless someone somehow makes a viewfinder on the right side of the camera. :D
Even though I am left-eyed, I do understand why most VF cameras, whether optical or electronic, have the finder on the left side of the camera: over 80% of the general population are right-eyed (I'm making the assumption that a similar percentage of photographers are, also), so it would be foolish to cater to less than 20% of your market. At least with my Sony A65, I can close the LCD so as not to deal with nose-smudges.
-
I don't often see a mention of an advantage of EVF in B&W photography. If you set the camera to B&W, the EVF (or LCD) shows you a B&W version of the scene, but you can still capture as RAW so you can tweak the RGB components in post as usual.
-
I don't really think so. A viewfinder in the center of the camera causes issues for both left and right eyed shooters. A viewfinder on the top left saves right eyed shooters, but left eyed shooters unfortunately have to deal with LCD smudges and nose interference in both viewfinder locations...unless someone somehow makes a viewfinder on the right side of the camera. :D
I'm glad I didn't know that all my professional life!
No wonder that I now major on the cellpix device...
Rob C
-
I'd like to throw in a big disadvantage for me with EVFs, and that is trying to focus a non-native lens. I have an R adapter for my Panasonic G2, and trying to use the EVF to get a sharp focus is an exercise in frustration. The resolution simply isn't enough to determine where the exact focus point is. With a native lens, the G2 can be made to switch into a 5x display mode, so you have a much better idea of sharpness, but when you rotate the focus ring on an R lens, it can't detect that, and you can't simply switch it into magnification mode through the menu.
Oh, and I was using the 100mm f/2.8 APO macro, so I'm reasonably certain any fuzziness wasn't from the lens. ;D
-
Hi,
The Sony cameras have a button that activates magnified view and it can be moved around with the joystick. It works fine. On the Sony there is also peaking, although I don't think it is precise enough.
Using magnified view is a bit slow but makes for exact focusing.
Best regards
Erik
I'd like to throw in a big disadvantage for me with EVFs, and that is trying to focus a non-native lens. I have an R adapter for my Panasonic G2, and trying to use the EVF to get a sharp focus is an exercise in frustration. The resolution simply isn't enough to determine where the exact focus point is. With a native lens, the G2 can be made to switch into a 5x display mode, so you have a much better idea of sharpness, but when you rotate the focus ring on an R lens, it can't detect that, and you can't simply switch it into magnification mode through the menu.
-
Hi,
The Sony cameras have a button that activates magnified view and it can be moved around with the joystick. It works fine. On the Sony there is also peaking, although I don't think it is precise enough.
Using magnified view is a bit slow but makes for exact focusing.
Does it show you the 'wide open' feed in bright light? The X100 has this but it is useless in bright light since the lens stops down so that the EVF doesn't wash out which means you end up trying to critically focus an f/2 shot but with the lens at f/11 or something.
-
Does it show you the 'wide open' feed in bright light? The X100 has this but it is useless in bright light since the lens stops down so that the EVF doesn't wash out which means you end up trying to critically focus an f/2 shot but with the lens at f/11 or something.
and somehow CDAF does not miss in such conditions even @ 1.4... so EVF is only necessary for framing.
-
and you can't simply switch it into magnification mode through the menu.
hmmm... the manual (for G2) says
"MF ASSIST Even without rotating the focus ring, the MF assist can be displayed with the following operations" and instruction follows (page 83+).
-
hmmm... the manual (for G2) says
"MF ASSIST Even without rotating the focus ring, the MF assist can be displayed with the following operations" and instruction follows (page 83+).
Hmmm. That wasn't obvious from the camera's menu. I'll check the manual.
Thanks.
Ah! Got it. You have to use the touch panel to indicate the point of focus and activate the 5x magnification. I normally run with the panel reversed to protect the screen, and use the EVF so I don't need glasses to see the panel.
-
Hmmm. That wasn't obvious from the camera's menu. I'll check the manual.
Thanks.
Panasonic manuals are not the very well written indeed.
-
... the lens stops down so that the EVF doesn't wash out which means you end up trying to critically focus an f/2 shot but with the lens at f/11 or something.
Sony SLT-A35 manual-mode: set f/2 and lengthen the exposure to 30 seconds and the EVF will show white; set f/22 and shorten the exposure to 1/4000 second and the EVF will show black(ish).
-
Now, I have not seen any problem with that. I'm pretty sure it's full open. I just checked, it's full open.
Best regards
Erik
Does it show you the 'wide open' feed in bright light? The X100 has this but it is useless in bright light since the lens stops down so that the EVF doesn't wash out which means you end up trying to critically focus an f/2 shot but with the lens at f/11 or something.
-
Now, I have not seen any problem with that. I'm pretty sure it's full open. I just checked, it's full open.
Best regards
Erik
may be it is just some specifics of Fuji's implementation in X100...
-
Hmmm. That wasn't obvious from the camera's menu. I'll check the manual.
Thanks.
Ah! Got it. You have to use the touch panel to indicate the point of focus and activate the 5x magnification. I normally run with the panel reversed to protect the screen, and use the EVF so I don't need glasses to see the panel.
I don't know how it's in G2 but in GH2 I just have to press back wheel to activate magnified mode.
In G1 it required to press two buttons (left arrow and ok)
With single button press it's really easy to set the focus correct.
It will be even better with G3 like mode when you can see whole frame with magnified window.
-
For me the biggest advantage is having a zoom in the viewfinder. Does wonders for focusing manual lenses.
-
Hmmm. That wasn't obvious from the camera's menu. I'll check the manual.
Thanks.
Ah! Got it. You have to use the touch panel to indicate the point of focus and activate the 5x magnification. I normally run with the panel reversed to protect the screen, and use the EVF so I don't need glasses to see the panel.
Yes, we have liftoff. I used the touch screen to activate 5x magnification, and could either touch the "+" or use the dial to increase it to 10x. Best of all, when I move my eye to the viewfinder, it automatically switches, and keeps the magnification mode. Neat.
[sigh] But I still miss the viewfinder of my old R7, or any SLR, for that matter. The experience isn't the same, even if I can make it work.
-
Hi,
SLRs have been around for 76 years, the first one being Ihagee Kine Exakta. Viewfinders on these early models were awful. I have seen plenty of Hasselblads in the 80-es and the viewfinders were not impressive at all. The viewfinder on my Pentax 67 from 1993 doesn't have a chance compared to the viewfinder of my Sony Alpha 900. Development have been impressive in those 76 years.
In comparison, EVF still is wearing baby shoes.
Best regards
Erik
Yes, we have liftoff. I used the touch screen to activate 5x magnification, and could either touch the "+" or use the dial to increase it to 10x. Best of all, when I move my eye to the viewfinder, it automatically switches, and keeps the magnification mode. Neat.
[sigh] But I still miss the viewfinder of my old R7, or any SLR, for that matter. The experience isn't the same, even if I can make it work.