Why EVF will never replace OVF for me

Started 11 months ago | Discussions
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Interesting! And why undesirable?
In reply to nigelht, 11 months ago

I actually had no idea it could be done that way too! It's obvious now that I hear about it, but I wouldn't have thought of it myself.

Why isn't it desirable? That technique would actually seem very good for low-light EVF, and if implemented I think it would improve current EVFs immensely. Are there any other methods? Signal gain introduces a lot of noise, that's not desirable either.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
I didn't want to say it
In reply to Ron Poelman, 11 months ago

but it was incredibly awful, and disgustingly arrogant. Artsy, not art. Come on! Try a little harder

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
So much wrong with this
In reply to amalric, 11 months ago

a 100% OVF shows you EXACTLY what the sensor sees (framing). Correct exposure (that should know just by looking around you) will get you the result you want, in other words the results you already knew you'd get. RAW is for latitude, no correct exposure can capture 20+ stops of DR in a JPG. It's not just about fixing mistakes. Nothing's uglier than an overexposed window, unless you want to depict a heavenly domicile where pure white lite flows in through the window.

Everything camera related was invented in Asia. Everything. A lot of other technology was also invented in Asia. Western people in general aren't as inventive, or work as much, and like you suggested, are resistant to change. That doesn't mean every Asian likes an EVF, though most Asians are pretty eager to try out anything new, whatever it is. Asia is a big continent, and despite cultural similarities not every Asian is exactly like every other Asian.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Erik Magnuson
Forum ProPosts: 12,098Gear list
Like?
Non-destructive read or image stacking?
In reply to nigelht, 11 months ago

nigelht wrote:

Every 1/24th of a second (or whatever desired refresh rate) I can show the image produced by integrating over the prior 10 seconds of time.

This requires that you can do a non-destructive read of the pixel voltages. I did not think contemporary sensors could do this.

The olympus OMD "live time" long exposure feature can kinda sorta do this. [5][6] Since you can get up to 24 previews then for a 12 second exposure you can get a preview every half second. It's not a constant refresh but it's a more useful feature the way it's done. I wish more cameras could do this.

Given the timings involved, I suspect Olympus is basically doing in-camera image stacking, i.e. every 0.5s the sensor is read (and reset) and the values are simply added added together to update the display or the cumulative exposure.  If they could do an actual non-destructive read, then there would be no need to restrict the time of the updates to 0.5s.

-- hide signature --

Erik

 Erik Magnuson's gear list:Erik Magnuson's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 450D Sigma SD10 Sony Alpha NEX-5 Nikon D3200 +28 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Erik Magnuson
Forum ProPosts: 12,098Gear list
Like?
So much wrong with this!
In reply to canonagain123, 11 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

Everything camera related was invented in Asia. Everything

Even assuming you are talking only about digital, Kodak would beg to disagree. To the point of hundreds of millions in patent royalties from Japanese companies.  (Hint: who invented the Bayer color filter array?)

Even pre-digital, why did Minolta pay millions to Honeywell over autofocus?

-- hide signature --

Erik

 Erik Magnuson's gear list:Erik Magnuson's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 450D Sigma SD10 Sony Alpha NEX-5 Nikon D3200 +28 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: So much wrong with this!
In reply to Erik Magnuson, 11 months ago

Erik Magnuson wrote:

canonagain123 wrote:

Everything camera related was invented in Asia. Everything

Even assuming you are talking only about digital, Kodak would beg to disagree. To the point of hundreds of millions in patent royalties from Japanese companies. (Hint: who invented the Bayer color filter array?)

Even pre-digital, why did Minolta pay millions to Honeywell over autofocus?

-- hide signature --

Erik

I don't know. Wikipedia only says Honeywell imported Pentax cameras, I could find nothing else. I didn't know who invented the Bayer filter, but now I do. I didn't actually pay attention to the name. It could have been just an invented product name. It sounds kind of Thai.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nigelht
Regular MemberPosts: 430Gear list
Like?
Re: Interesting! And why undesirable?
In reply to canonagain123, 11 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

I actually had no idea it could be done that way too! It's obvious now that I hear about it, but I wouldn't have thought of it myself.

Why isn't it desirable? That technique would actually seem very good for low-light EVF, and if implemented I think it would improve current EVFs immensely. Are there any other methods? Signal gain introduces a lot of noise, that's not desirable either.

Undesirable 99% of the time because you get a smeared mess.  As for the other 1% of the time...you probably aren't taking pictures although the Oly implementation is useful.

Signal gain will generate noise in the EVF but without the blur.  It's also probably a lot easier.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Erik Magnuson
Forum ProPosts: 12,098Gear list
Like?
Re: So much wrong with this!
In reply to canonagain123, 11 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

I don't know. Wikipedia only says Honeywell imported Pentax cameras, I could find nothing else.

It's in the Minolta article: "Minolta purchased the patent rights to autofocus lens technology from Leica Camera in the 1970s [...] Unfortunately for Minolta, its autofocus design was found to infringe on the patents of Honeywell, a U.S. corporation. After protracted litigation, in 1991 Minolta was ordered to pay Honeywell damages, penalties, trial costs, and other expenses in a final amount of $127.6 million"

-- hide signature --

Erik

 Erik Magnuson's gear list:Erik Magnuson's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 450D Sigma SD10 Sony Alpha NEX-5 Nikon D3200 +28 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nigelht
Regular MemberPosts: 430Gear list
Like?
Re: Non-destructive read or image stacking?
In reply to Erik Magnuson, 11 months ago

Erik Magnuson wrote:

nigelht wrote:

Every 1/24th of a second (or whatever desired refresh rate) I can show the image produced by integrating over the prior 10 seconds of time.

This requires that you can do a non-destructive read of the pixel voltages. I did not think contemporary sensors could do this.

I don't know what the current sensors do but you can build CMOS sensors with non-destructive read.

There is some conjecture that Nikon is using that to get 14 bit resolution while using a 12-bit ADC.  Either there is a non-destructive read capability in the sensor and Canon does this as part of their noise reduction process.

Or it's all fancy software processing.  I don't have any definitive citations that state either way.  Just some astro forum conjecture.

The olympus OMD "live time" long exposure feature can kinda sorta do this. [5][6] Since you can get up to 24 previews then for a 12 second exposure you can get a preview every half second. It's not a constant refresh but it's a more useful feature the way it's done. I wish more cameras could do this.

Given the timings involved, I suspect Olympus is basically doing in-camera image stacking, i.e. every 0.5s the sensor is read (and reset) and the values are simply added added together to update the display or the cumulative exposure. If they could do an actual non-destructive read, then there would be no need to restrict the time of the updates to 0.5s.

-- hide signature --

Erik

That seems a likely possibility.  That would explain why they limit the number of previews as readout noise would all get added together.  Although if they had non-destructive reads that's probably true as well.

Hmmm.  Dunno.

I didn't see an interview of an oly engineer that explains how they do this but perhaps its in Japanese or something or they simply don't want to talk about it.  I'd figure that a Canon or Nikon engineer could guess how its done anyway.

It's a very cool feature that I would probably use once a year (July 4th).  Maybe twice if I wanted to do some long exposure flowing water pics or night time traffic pics somewhere.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nigelht
Regular MemberPosts: 430Gear list
Like?
Re: So much wrong with this!
In reply to Erik Magnuson, 11 months ago

We first developed CCD and CMOS imaging technology too.

A side benefit of NASA and a very large defense industry...I think CCD was bell labs and CMOS was JPL.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Erik Magnuson
Forum ProPosts: 12,098Gear list
Like?
Re: Non-destructive read or image stacking?
In reply to nigelht, 11 months ago

nigelht wrote:

I don't know what the current sensors do but you can build CMOS sensors with non-destructive read.

IIRC the cost in light sensitive area was high due to the extra circuitry required - similar to why global electronic shutters are not common.

That seems a likely possibility. That would explain why they limit the number of previews as readout noise would all get added together.

If it takes 1/16th of a second to read the sensor (similar to the Panasonic electronic shutter time), then sampling at mose every .5s means you don't notice any exposure differential in the preview between top and bottom (or side to side) as it's only 1/8 of a stop delta on the 0.5s exposure.

-- hide signature --

Erik

 Erik Magnuson's gear list:Erik Magnuson's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 450D Sigma SD10 Sony Alpha NEX-5 Nikon D3200 +28 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
amalric
Forum ProPosts: 10,815
Like?
Re: So much wrong with this
In reply to canonagain123, 11 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

a 100% OVF shows you EXACTLY what the sensor sees (framing). Correct exposure (that should know just by looking around you) will get you the result you want, in other words the results you already knew you'd get. RAW is for latitude, no correct exposure can capture 20+ stops of DR in a JPG. It's not just about fixing mistakes. Nothing's uglier than an overexposed window, unless you want to depict a heavenly domicile where pure white lite flows in through the window.

I am left wondering if you have even tried a WYSIWYG camera, also known as mirrorless.

I am sure that people get them so that they can avoid RAW. That is the reason why Olympus provides so many ways to pre-process in camera.

Live Time which allows to *visualise* in real time a long exposure building up, is only the latest device. Tone and colour management, WB correction, etc where all things that were not available when Photoshop and RAW started their run.

Perhaps a bit of updating?

PS Journalists and pros in a hurry often try to *avoid* RAW. Is it so difficult to understand why?

Am.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lightpath48
Senior MemberPosts: 2,384Gear list
Like?
Yes, for me… but not for you
In reply to Erik Magnuson, 11 months ago

Yes, you've described it exactly for me. I don't need the technical razor-splitting protocols you describe. My camera EVF, Mac monitor and my professional print service work close enough together for my needs, including 24" X 36" prints that look very good on walls. Seriously, you're calibrating in a different universe than I. That's awesome.

 Lightpath48's gear list:Lightpath48's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P7800 Nikon D3300 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR II
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
if I was doing reporting photography
In reply to amalric, 11 months ago

amalric wrote:

canonagain123 wrote:

a 100% OVF shows you EXACTLY what the sensor sees (framing). Correct exposure (that should know just by looking around you) will get you the result you want, in other words the results you already knew you'd get. RAW is for latitude, no correct exposure can capture 20+ stops of DR in a JPG. It's not just about fixing mistakes. Nothing's uglier than an overexposed window, unless you want to depict a heavenly domicile where pure white lite flows in through the window.

I am left wondering if you have even tried a WYSIWYG camera, also known as mirrorless.

I am sure that people get them so that they can avoid RAW. That is the reason why Olympus provides so many ways to pre-process in camera.

Live Time which allows to *visualise* in real time a long exposure building up, is only the latest device. Tone and colour management, WB correction, etc where all things that were not available when Photoshop and RAW started their run.

Perhaps a bit of updating?

PS Journalists and pros in a hurry often try to *avoid* RAW. Is it so difficult to understand why?

Am.

you can bet your socks on me doing all JPG all the time. However, that's not what I'm doing, so I use RAW almost always. If I quickly need a picture, then I'll use JPG. I'm not sure what you wanted to say.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TrapperJohn
Forum ProPosts: 10,827
Like?
I beg to differ
In reply to canonagain123, 11 months ago

An OVF shows you 100% of what you see, not what the sensor sees.

A good EVF, a really good one, shows you 100% of what your recorded image will be, including exposure (especially if you have live histo active), DOF at current shutter/aperture/ISO, WB (if shooting jpeg), and a few other handy options.

As to where everything camera related was created... Photography began in France with the discovery that silver nitrate was sensitive to light, and could record images. Most of the modern camera and lens design originated in Germany. Zeiss and Leitz came up with the basic individual lens designs that are in use today. Leitz created the first successful interchangeable lens system: the Leica. The first mirror and prism SLR was created by Zeiss: the Contaflex. The LCD and the LED were invented in the US as is the microprocessor that runs a digital camera. The digital image sensor was invented by... Kodak, who also built the first commercially successful DSLR.

Almost all of the great inventions that make modern life possible, were invented in either the US or Europe. The steam engine, electricity, radio, video, microprocessor, internal combustion engine, automobile, airplane, networking... gunpowder was invented in China, but it took Europeans to show what could really be done with it.

Asia is great at taking someone else's idea and manufacturing it at low cost, but without the western world, they wouldn't have a camera design to manufacture.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: I beg to differ a whole lot more
In reply to TrapperJohn, 11 months ago

TrapperJohn wrote:

An OVF shows you 100% of what you see, not what the sensor sees.

A good EVF, a really good one, shows you 100% of what your recorded image will be, including exposure (especially if you have live histo active), DOF at current shutter/aperture/ISO, WB (if shooting jpeg), and a few other handy options.

As to where everything camera related was created... Photography began in France with the discovery that silver nitrate was sensitive to light, and could record images. Most of the modern camera and lens design originated in Germany. Zeiss and Leitz came up with the basic individual lens designs that are in use today. Leitz created the first successful interchangeable lens system: the Leica. The first mirror and prism SLR was created by Zeiss: the Contaflex. The LCD and the LED were invented in the US as is the microprocessor that runs a digital camera. The digital image sensor was invented by... Kodak, who also built the first commercially successful DSLR.

Almost all of the great inventions that make modern life possible, were invented in either the US or Europe. The steam engine, electricity, radio, video, microprocessor, internal combustion engine, automobile, airplane, networking... gunpowder was invented in China, but it took Europeans to show what could really be done with it.

Asia is great at taking someone else's idea and manufacturing it at low cost, but without the western world, they wouldn't have a camera design to manufacture.

Asia (Korea, Japan) is years, even decades ahead of the Western world in many things that westerners have copied, and poorly I might add: robotic exoskeleton (Japan), nanotechnology (nanofilm, nanotransistor) (Korea), robotics and androids (Japan), electric cars (way more advanced in Japan and Korea where they're actually part of normal traffic, westerners only have them on design boards), and so on. Your claim is simply ridiculous and a perfect example of white supremacy delusions, but I won't discuss that further because that carries a risk of this turning political/flaming. By the way, China has the world's largest solar plant and China produces over 50 GW of solar power. USA is producing one GW.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
EinsteinsGhost
Forum ProPosts: 11,977Gear list
Like?
Replacement? No
In reply to canonagain123, 11 months ago

Digital sensor didn't really replace film, it displaced it. One could debate how film was great and brings back nostalgia to many but if you are shooting digital now, you have moved on. I don't think digital conversion is complete yet, but it is being done as possibilities allow.

 EinsteinsGhost's gear list:EinsteinsGhost's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-F828 Sony SLT-A55 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM Sony 135mm F2.8 (T4.5) STF +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Erik Magnuson
Forum ProPosts: 12,098Gear list
Like?
Re: Yes, for me… but not for you
In reply to Lightpath48, 11 months ago

Lightpath48 wrote:

Yes, you've described it exactly for me. I don't need the technical razor-splitting protocols you describe.

An example from last week: shooting near the "blue hour" where the DR of the sky vs. ground exceeds what an un-manipulated JPEG or EVF can handle. I know what I wanted my final image to look like but I would have to expose for one part and then lighten/darken the other.  Possibilities for getting what I had in mind included multi-shot HDR and/or a (software) graduated filter and/or dodging/burning and/or maybe even some fill-flash.  The EVF can't show me any of these options pre-shot -- of course you can chimp afterwards with any camera.   With an EVF,  if I exposed for the shadows, then the clouds would be blown in the VF and it would be hard to see their details; if I exposed for the sky, then I could not see what the foreground interest was doing at that moment (e.g. a person fishing.)

There are workarounds for all of this of course but if you do any non-trivial processing, what you see in the EVF is not going to be closer to the final image than what you see in an OVF.

-- hide signature --

Erik

 Erik Magnuson's gear list:Erik Magnuson's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 450D Sigma SD10 Sony Alpha NEX-5 Nikon D3200 +28 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ron Poelman
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,310Gear list
Like?
We'll do the jokes.
In reply to canonagain123, 11 months ago

If you could just concentrate on rounding up the dead horses, the flogging can continue.

 Ron Poelman's gear list:Ron Poelman's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H2 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 Sony SLT-A57 Sony Alpha 7R
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nigelht
Regular MemberPosts: 430Gear list
Like?
Re: I beg to differ a whole lot more
In reply to canonagain123, 11 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

Asia (Korea, Japan) is years, even decades ahead of the Western world in many things that westerners have copied, and poorly I might add:

robotic exoskeleton (Japan),

The earliest exoskeletons were US DoD funded. HAL might be considered ahead of HULC and XOS because it's on the market but I'd hardly say the Japanese are years ahead of us.

Given the poor performance of domestic Japanese robots at Fukushima and the relative good performance of the iRobot robots (the same folks that make the roomba) don't confuse anime with reality.

nanotechnology (nanofilm, nanotransistor) (Korea),

Richard Feynman, 1959.

Enabled be the scanning tunneling microscope, 1981 IBM Zurich

Given the US National Nanotechnology Initiative it is highly unlikely that the Koreans are years ahead of us. Possible, but very unlikely.

robotics and androids (Japan),

See Fukushima. Trust me that the US has fielded more mobile robots (i.e. non-industrial ones) than any other nation. They may not be cute like ASIMO but we have them in use by the thousands.

In terms of industrial robots Japan is number one. US is #2. Germany #3.

electric cars (way more advanced in Japan and Korea where they're actually part of normal traffic, westerners only have them on design boards), and so on.

Yes, I've never seen a Leaf or a Tesla on a US road. Oh wait. I have. There's one in my parking lot. There's also a Volt plug-in hybrid.

Who had the most electric vehicles in 2012? The US. 38% of all EVs in existence in 2012 were in the US (71,000) vs 24% in Japan (45,000).

This counts plug-in hybrids where the US dominates (70% of all 2012 PHEV sales was in the US). In pure EV (battery) Japan had 28% of the 2012 world sales followed by the US with 26% of 2012 world sales.

http://www.iea.org/publications/globalevoutlook_2013.pdf

Your claim is simply ridiculous and a perfect example of white supremacy delusions, but I won't discuss that further because that carries a risk of this turning political/flaming. By the way, China has the world's largest solar plant and China produces over 50 GW of solar power. USA is producing one GW.

"The US overtook China for installed utility-scale solar capacity in the final quarter of 2013 and now exceeds 5GW, solar project tracking website Wiki-Solar claims.

...

Wiki-Solar founder Philip Wolfe said: “We’ve known for some time that America’s pipeline of giga-scale projects would take it to the top of the table. Thanks to a further 12GW still in development, it should stay there for some time; though China’s progress is also impressive – and they have a habit of springing new capacity on us with little warning.""

http://www.pv-tech.org/news/wiki_solar_us_overtook_china_for_installed_utility_scale_pv_capacity_in_q3

Also:

"Overall, the US saw 4.2GW of new solar capacity added last year, boosting the country’s total market by 15% compared to 2012 and making it the world's largest market outside Asia in 2013.

The fourth quarter of 2013 was particularly strong, with 1.4GW of new capacity installed in total."

http://www.pv-tech.org/news/north_carolina_and_texas_shine_in_record_2013_for_us_solar

We built more than 1GW of new solar in a single quarter. We have 10GW of current capacity so you're only off by an order of magnitude.

Who was #1? Not China but Germany with 32GW in Dec 2012.

China plans to hit 35GW by 2015.

http://www.kurzweilai.net/china-plans-to-quadruple-solar-power-generating-capacity-by-2015

/shrug

There's a bit of grass is always greener somewhere else but the natural advantages that the US enjoys provides us with a commanding lead in most areas.

2nd richest in natural resources (behind Russia)

3rd largest land mass (behind Russia and Canada)

3rd largest population (behind India and China)

This provides us with:

1st largest economy

Which in turn fuels our huge military and technology research endeavors.

No politics.  Just facts.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads