OVFs on SLRs vs. EVFs

[Romphotog]

I must prefer LCD and EVF over OVF on SLRs. On P&S cameras, the LCD is bright, full color, large, and in the last 2 years quick enough to catch movement. On SLRs, the OVF's are greenish and dark. Furthermore, when you take the photo, the mirror blacks out the view. Cameras which have EVFs, dont have mirrors, thus you can quickly pan with the subject.

I am not saying I love EVFs; some are better (Kodak, Olympus) than others, Sony H9 is horrible, Canon S5 IS has too many pixels. However, EVF's are in color, though they are slow at this time(there is maybe a 1/2sec lag). The window viewers on P&S's are the best for viewing how the world is, but they have a parallex error, no info, and no histogram. SLRs are starting to come around to the world of live-view LCDs; cameras such as Canon 40D, Nikon D300, Olympus E-410, E-510, E-3, Pentax K20D, Sony DSLR-A300, DSLR-A350.

BTW, I got eye strain from looking thru EVFs and OVF too long. Also, if you keep your left eye closed, and look thru an SLR's OVF, you are missing out on whats happening all around you. I get dizzy from all the turns and twists with an SLR trying to capture, focus, and follow the action, or re-focus on another subject behind me. Try it, is it easier to make a 180 with a live LCD or an OVF?

 

[Big Mike]

I prefer the larger sensor size and better image quality of a DSLR. The viewing system is secondary to that.

 

[DSLR noob]

I preffer WYSIWYG, DOF previewing, manual focusing, and a proper sensor. also, the real shutter noise quickly puts pea shooters in their place.

 

[patrickt]

1. The OVF on my DSLR is neither green nor dark.
2. I can use it in bright sunlight as opposed to the LCD.
3. The mirror blacks out the view for at least 1/10th of a second. Oh, the horror.
4. I like the stability of using the OVF with slower shutter speeds.
5. I don't walk around, or move, with the viewfinder up to my eye--or staring at an LCD--so none of that is material. Moving to follow action with an OVF is infinitely easier for me than with an LCD at arms length.

I have no problem with those who prefer an EVF or LCD but lets at least try and keep the discussion honest. Green?

 

[Alex_B]

Is it national acronym day? LCD EVF OVF SLR P&S ... lol

Well, my OVF ist not dark at all! (depends on the lens you use with it ) ... with an f/1.4 it is actually very bright sometimes

I never saw my OVF being greenish, unless when I shoot landscapes with lots of grass in them :mrgreen:

Also my OVF is quite large (OK, full frame does it here I have to admit)

I never realised the mirror being in the way ... those fractions of a second really go unnoticed (I could not imagine how this should influence panning?). Only when doing mirror lockup, then it turns black and I cannot see anything. But then again, I only use mirror lockup for shots that could not be done with any camera with an EVF anyway

On a side note, I have seen people putting away their LCD-only cameras as they completely gave up to take any images ... this was in quite harsh light and they just would not see anything on the screen.

I must prefer LCD and EVF over OVF on SLRs. On P&S cameras, the LCD is bright, full color, large, and in the last 2 years quick enough to catch movement. On SLRs, the OVF's are greenish and dark. Furthermore, when you take the photo, the mirror blacks out the view. Cameras which have EVFs, dont have mirrors, thus you can quickly pan with the subject.

 

[Romphotog]

On a side note, I have seen people putting away their LCD-only cameras as they completely gave up to take any images ... this was in quite harsh light and they just would not see anything on the screen.

Well, that's what EVF's were made for! To see in the dark, and shooting into the sun.
As for not seeing green and dark OVF, I will go back to B&H to check out DSLRs once again. If anyone wants to join me there for a comparison of OVF and EVF, let me know when.
PS: too bad heavy rain today as there is a photo meetup meeting at B&H.

 

[Alex_B]

Well, that's what EVF's were made for!

I know, that is why I was talking of plain LCD.

As for not seeing green and dark OVF, I will go back to B&H to check out DSLRs once again.

Well, the slower the lens, the darker the image in the OVF. But never green, where should a colour cast come from anyway?

Try a full frame SLR with a fast lens, and you will see the image as bright as if you were just using your eyes.

 

[Drake]

Well, that's what EVF's were made for! To see in the dark, and shooting into the sun.

Nah, sorry mate, but have you ever actually tried shooting a photo through EVF's in low light? Your camera's sensor won't see a thing live in poor light conditions, so neither will you in it's EVF. It is just not going to happen. And even if you actually see something, it will still be not enough for your camera to auto focus and because of the relatively big pixels in most EVFs you won't be able to focus accurately yourself. I owned an ultrazoom camera for a year and never found myself in a lighting condition where the EVF was any better than the standard big LCD. Well, looking right into the camera is cool though. I've just purchased a DSLR and love the clarity of it's OVF.

 

[Alpha]

Ground glass. I win.

 

[jstuedle]

For most of us the eye level viewfinder of a SLR is more natural. I shoot with both eyes open so I can be aware of what is going on around me. And eye strain is non-existent when the eyepiece is corrected with the diopter adjustment. The LCD is a pain in the butt to use when mounting long lenses, who can keep a rig steady at arms length? Electronic viewfinders have a lag that is unacceptable for sport shooting or active PJ work. And as mentioned in low light, they are totally unacceptable. But that's my opinion. It is all personal preference and your style of shooting. With the optical eye level finder of a good SLR, I give up nothing, nothing at all.