Why EVF will never replace OVF for me

Started 9 months ago | Discussions
amalric
Forum ProPosts: 10,809
Like?
I was doing reporting photography...
In reply to canonagain123, 9 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

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.

Just that. That I was doing PJ and I was using slides, like most PJ. The modern equivalent of Jpegs.

Now that I do Street Shooting as a hobby I apply the same principles of HCB: never spray and pray, take just one shot, for good or evil, and never rework it. 'There are no maybes':

http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/21/cartier-bresson-there-are-no-maybes/?_r=2

Every image is a pass or fail. The 'cooking' in the digital darkroom is for commercial hacks.

Another philosophy, the decisive instant.

Am.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nigelht
Regular MemberPosts: 407Gear list
Like?
Re: I beg to differ
In reply to TrapperJohn, 9 months ago

TrapperJohn wrote:

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.

China invented papermaking, the compass, gunpowder and printing.

More important than that they invented fermentation, ice cream and toilet paper.

With respect to gunpowder, the Chinese had exploding cannonballs in the 14th century (we're talking Hundred Yeas's War level of military technology in Europe at the time).  That we caught up and kicked their butts later doesn't mean that they weren't centuries ahead in the state of the art for a long time.

As late as the Ming Dynasty (1600s) Chinese forces were able to defeat western forces although it took a large numerical advantage (that said, the Dutch WERE in a fortress).

The conquest by the Manchus (Qing) kinda put China in the same position of the Western Roman Empire after Odoacer became the King of Italy.  Evaluate the state of western european civilization in 476 AD and you would probably see a grimmer looking decline than Qing dynasty China.  It was China's bad luck that this happened just as we were really kicking military advances in high gear and feeling all colonial expansion-like.

Prior to that China was the superpower that enjoyed all the advantages or manpower, technology and natural resources.

Perhaps there's a cautionary tale in there somewhere.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
headfirst
Contributing MemberPosts: 585Gear list
Like?
Re: Why EVF will never replace OVF for me
In reply to Erik Magnuson, 9 months ago

Erik Magnuson wrote:

I know that even in DSLRs from ~5 years ago the sensor can see things in low light that I can't. Modern sensors are noticeably better.

Have you ever let your eyes become completely night adapted? It's amazing what you can see by just starlight as long as there are not brighter light sources to ruin your adaptation.

-- hide signature --

Erik

yes, ex-military.

& where I live we have more clouds than clear skies.

 headfirst's gear list:headfirst's gear list
Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D Sony Alpha DSLR-A200 Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Sony Alpha DSLR-A580 Sony SLT-A77 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
headfirst
Contributing MemberPosts: 585Gear list
Like?
Re: What eyes did you use for your test?
In reply to canonagain123, 9 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

My eyes can see better than the LV in my camera (5d II or any other DSLR I've ever used) in any light. I'm sorry that's not the case with your eyes. I promise I'm not an escaped lab experiment, I have a good vision and a good night vision. My night vision, like everyone's, requires several minutes to be be functional, 15-20 minutes for full night vision.

The room was completely dark except for some red leds, blue leds and green leds, providing a total of (estimated) 0.007-0.015 lux of light. Starlight is 0.001-0.03906 lux.

Show me an EVF that can see anything in that light, and I'll be happy to recant my statements about the EVF being useless to me.

Well, I'm 50 so I'm aware that my night-vision isn't what it was when I was 14 ...

But I'm also ex-military so I'm well aware of how night vision works.

An EVF doesn't see anything, it displays ... & as I said a Sony SLT with "vf setting effect off" works essentially as an image intensifier.

 headfirst's gear list:headfirst's gear list
Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D Sony Alpha DSLR-A200 Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Sony Alpha DSLR-A580 Sony SLT-A77 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: What eyes did you use for your test?
In reply to headfirst, 9 months ago

Then, like I already said in my previous post, it's a different from any EVF I've ever used.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: I was doing reporting photography...
In reply to amalric, 9 months ago

amalric wrote:

canonagain123 wrote:

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.

Just that. That I was doing PJ and I was using slides, like most PJ. The modern equivalent of Jpegs.

Now that I do Street Shooting as a hobby I apply the same principles of HCB: never spray and pray, take just one shot, for good or evil, and never rework it. 'There are no maybes':

http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/21/cartier-bresson-there-are-no-maybes/?_r=2

Every image is a pass or fail. The 'cooking' in the digital darkroom is for commercial hacks.

Another philosophy, the decisive instant.

Am.

Hey, let's go a little lighter on the name calling Tactfully done post can improve any image when not taken to extremes. It's not meant to fix photos you shouldn't have taken/kept in the first place, just improve a little on the ones that were worth keeping.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
headfirst
Contributing MemberPosts: 585Gear list
Like?
Re: What eyes did you use for your test?
In reply to canonagain123, 9 months ago

then you need to change your post then to "no EVF that I have used so far will ever replace an OVF for me".

OVF & EVF are different & both have pros & cons. But EVFs are still improving whereas OVFs are mature & unlikely to change significantly.

 headfirst's gear list:headfirst's gear list
Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D Sony Alpha DSLR-A200 Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Sony Alpha DSLR-A580 Sony SLT-A77 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MediaArchivist
Senior MemberPosts: 1,094Gear list
Like?
How romantic
In reply to amalric, 9 months ago

amalric wrote:

Just that. That I was doing PJ and I was using slides, like most PJ. The modern equivalent of Jpegs.

Now that I do Street Shooting as a hobby I apply the same principles of HCB: never spray and pray, take just one shot, for good or evil, and never rework it. 'There are no maybes':

http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/21/cartier-bresson-there-are-no-maybes/?_r=2

Every image is a pass or fail. The 'cooking' in the digital darkroom is for commercial hacks.

A fascinating travel back in time, but I have to wonder how relevant that philosophy is today? It is not hard to imagine disparaging spray-n-pray if it meant I was stuck in a darkroom for the weekend! But I don't have a darkroom, nor do I need one. A romantic attachment to the days of yore is not going to make anyone a better photographer, or produce better photos.

I am not going to abandon my camera's metering nor will I eschew color or my 32G memory cards in order to pretend I am an award winning photographer from 1972.

-- hide signature --

Want a roXplosion!?

 MediaArchivist's gear list:MediaArchivist's gear list
Sony SLT-A99 Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Sony 135mm F2.8 (T4.5) STF Sony 24mm F2 SSM Carl Zeiss Distagon T* Samyang 8mm F3.5 Aspherical IF MC Fisheye +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: I beg to differ a whole lot more
In reply to nigelht, 9 months ago

nigelht wrote:

Just facts.

I'd check many of your facts from a little more reliable source That's my last contribution to this conversation, it yielded the same old, nothing new.

China will easily outdo those numbers: http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=4126

Even then, most solar panels in the USA are imported from China, because China is the world's largest solar panel producer: http://www.yinglisolar.com/us/about/

I have nothing more to add, I don't want pointless, stubborn bickering to ensue.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: What eyes did you use for your test?
In reply to headfirst, 9 months ago

in all honesty, I made this thread mostly to poke a little fun at OntarioTooFarGone He doesn't seem to have paid too much attention. Not that I didn't mean what I wrote. Maybe you're right, I should probably get a little more up-to-date on current EVFs

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Draek
Senior MemberPosts: 2,028Gear list
Like?
...so?
In reply to canonagain123, 9 months ago

What about the other 99.99% of the time? which, by your own admission, goes up to 100% if one only considers situations where one would actually be interested in taking photos.

Really, it's as if you picked your cameras based on how well their structural integrity held up in a vacuum, or in free fall at terminal velocity -- if you were in a situation where it'd matter, you'd have much bigger concerns to begin with.

 Draek's gear list:Draek's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR Samsung TL500 Canon PowerShot A1200 Sony Alpha DSLR-A390
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Shield3
Senior MemberPosts: 2,440Gear list
Like?
Re: Why EVF will never replace OVF for me
In reply to canonagain123, 9 months ago

This, plus the battery drain, plus the burst lag, plus shooting stars with an EVF?  No thanks.

I would like a camera body with both though, as shooting video the EVF is very handy.

 Shield3's gear list:Shield3's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
amalric
Forum ProPosts: 10,809
Like?
Re: I was doing reporting photography...
In reply to canonagain123, 9 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

amalric wrote:

canonagain123 wrote:

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.

Just that. That I was doing PJ and I was using slides, like most PJ. The modern equivalent of Jpegs.

Now that I do Street Shooting as a hobby I apply the same principles of HCB: never spray and pray, take just one shot, for good or evil, and never rework it. 'There are no maybes':

http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/21/cartier-bresson-there-are-no-maybes/?_r=2

Every image is a pass or fail. The 'cooking' in the digital darkroom is for commercial hacks.

Another philosophy, the decisive instant.

Am.

Hey, let's go a little lighter on the name calling Tactfully done post can improve any image when not taken to extremes. It's not meant to fix photos you shouldn't have taken/kept in the first place, just improve a little on the ones that were worth keeping.

Well, the modern version is that you can fix everything pertaining to the field an light conditions very easily in a mirrorless EVF, since you control the sensor.

But you can't really fix or fake the decisive instant, it's not painting, one must take a risk.

That is why commercial p/phy, Marriage one, is a boring beautifying and not reality. Ask yourself why Photoshop has made a mess, and contests have to react to it.

I am not avoiding Photoshop, i have learned it, and when mirrorless allowed good IQ from the start, I dropped it.

Am.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Shield3
Senior MemberPosts: 2,440Gear list
Like?
Re: Yes, for me… but not for you
In reply to Erik Magnuson, 9 months ago

Erik Magnuson wrote:

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

Exactly.  You should already have your camera set pretty closely to what your exposure is going to be before you lift the camera to your eye to snap the shot IMO.  Modern cameras meter light very well - if you really need that much handholding perhaps it's time to learn more about photography.

 Shield3's gear list:Shield3's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CharlesB58
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,792
Like?
Re: Why EVF will never replace OVF for me
In reply to canonagain123, 9 months ago

You do realize that the LCD on the back ofyour camera isn't equivalent to the latest Eye Level Finders, right?
--
If, in my lifetime, I will have produced just one image that makes a real difference in the life of another, I will have achieved my highest goal as a photographer.

http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/

http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lightpath48
Senior MemberPosts: 2,243Gear list
Like?
I understand
In reply to Erik Magnuson, 9 months ago

I also shoot raw and understand the DR challenges you've described. I generally expose for the highlights and pull the shadows up in post from the raw files, right in-camera.  I'm still wondering how working with an OVF instead of an EVF would give me any advantage in the circumstances you've described. (I used DSLRs with OVFs for ten years before going EVF.)  Because the Fuji EXR sensor sees much as I wish a camera to, it's not rocket science anymore. Most of what I shoot is close to what will go online for printing. S-RGB is fine. What I get back in the mail looks very close to my EVF and my iMac monitor. -Guess I'm just a lucky guy.

 Lightpath48's gear list:Lightpath48's gear list
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
Erik Magnuson
Forum ProPosts: 12,081Gear list
Like?
Re: I understand
In reply to Lightpath48, 9 months ago

Lightpath48 wrote:

I also shoot raw and understand the DR challenges you've described. I generally expose for the highlights and pull the shadows up in post from the raw files, right in-camera.

That's a global adjustment - as someone who learned photography in the darkroom, I'm accustomed to thinking in terms of localized adjustments. As a simple example, if you use flash (even just a little fill), how does the EVF show that?

I'm still wondering how working with an OVF instead of an EVF would give me any advantage in the circumstances you've described.

If you want to see the scene w/o the filter of the default processing so you can plan how you will process it.

Because the Fuji EXR sensor sees much as I wish a camera to,

I prefer not to be limited by the camera's processing choices.

Most of what I shoot is close to what will go online for printing. S-RGB is fine. What I get back in the mail looks very close to my EVF and my iMac monitor. -Guess I'm just a lucky guy.

It depends on what you shoot and how you process.  One size does not fit all.

-- 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: 407Gear list
Like?
Re: I beg to differ a whole lot more
In reply to canonagain123, 9 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

nigelht wrote:

Just facts.

I'd check many of your facts from a little more reliable source That's my last contribution to this conversation, it yielded the same old, nothing new.

China will easily outdo those numbers: http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=4126

Even then, most solar panels in the USA are imported from China, because China is the world's largest solar panel producer: http://www.yinglisolar.com/us/about/

I have nothing more to add, I don't want pointless, stubborn bickering to ensue.

Nowhere in your link does it say that China has 50GW of existing solar or that the US has only 1 GW of solar.

That is clearly wrong.

So are your assertions on electric vehicles.

/shrug

You brought it up in the first place.  If you want to call correcting your wrong numbers "bickering" then that's your prerogative.

Claiming that westerners aren't inventive and everything camera related was invented in Asia and then spouting a bunch of bogus numbers to support such a weird prejudice is trolling.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nigelht
Regular MemberPosts: 407Gear list
Like?
Re: I was doing reporting photography...
In reply to amalric, 9 months ago

amalric wrote:

But you can't really fix or fake the decisive instant, it's not painting, one must take a risk.

Heh, isn't that the basis for Canon's push to capture "micro expressions" from 4K video on the EOS-1D?

Just shoot video and pull stills…24 chances per second to get that decisive instant and capture the perfect "micro expression" moment.

*ducks and covers*

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
zkz5
Contributing MemberPosts: 662Gear list
Like?
Re: science, math, disprove?
In reply to canonagain123, 9 months ago

canonagain123 wrote:

let's go the mathematical way then. The EVF has to have a refresh rate of at least 1/24, right?

Nope.

If I use my EVF-equipped camera in very dark conditions the display refresh will slow down to compensate. I don't know what speed it is, maybe 1/10, but it is choppy and obviously slower than 1/24.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads