Does M4/3 or DSLR produce higher quality photo's

Started Apr 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
Martin.au
Senior MemberPosts: 5,425
Like?
Re: OMD viewfinder better than optical for low light?
In reply to Mahmoud Mousef, Apr 16, 2013

Mahmoud Mousef wrote:

Ulric wrote:

I agree with this. I've used cameras with OVF since the 70s and the E-M5, which is considered to have a good EVF, since last year and the EVF is superior in every way except in very low light.

Yes. And fast action, in my opinion.

I love the good things electronic viewfinders bring (displaying anything an LCD can) and I think that having one is a far more natural experience to what many are used to coming from regular digital cameras and phones.

I think a lot of the technical challenges will be overcome too, and I look forward to the day I can buy an EVF camera with OVF-like performance in the weak areas that need work today. It blows my mind to think where things will be in 10 years because I remember the last 10 years of digital development pretty well, and the progress is fantastic when you look back.

Until then I'll use both types of camera for different reasons.

My hunch is that the OM-D (at least) has no issue at all with fast action. All you have to do is use it enough to get used to it. It's a different feel to a DSLR, but once you get the hang of it fast action is not an issue. Motocross at least is a piece of cake.

Example:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3472108

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow