A 'DSLR' with EVF, will it ever happen?

[SNGX1327]

jeezus you wrote a lot, let me try and hit the main points

First off, I'm probably biased towards the kinds of shooting that I
mostly do.

I don't shoot sports. And I really don't do BIF, either.

okay, well for sports, or any type of photography where there is motion, having a zero-lag viewfinder is crucial. i can understand you being biased, but how many people out there use a camera for some sort of sports of action photos? i'd say a vast majority! even with my rebel XT and sigma 70-300 APO, i would take it to a ballgame and take pictures of baseball. having an optical viewfinder is crucial to that.

I also wouldn't compare a cheap P&S of today against what "might" be
possible in a fancy DSLR down the road a few years. I'm just
speculating about what could happen in the future (in the spirit of
what the original poster asked).

i'm not saying it will be exactly like today's P&S, but there is absolutely no way for an EVF to have zero lag compared to an optical light path. that's just physics. sure, they could probably improve the speed compared to a P&S, but it will never be perfect. today's P&S is an example of what lag looks like through an EVF or LCD.

I'd expect to be using a similar AF system to what we've got now, and
NOT rely on contrast detect AF from the sensor's data except when we
choose to use that mode for slow-moving or fixed scenes. So the AF
should not suffer at all because we'd still have what we've got now.
We might have contrast-based AF to supplement it, as an option, but I
would not toss out what we've already got.

i don't understand how this would be possible. in our cameras, there is a dedicated AF sensor. the light is split between the viewfinder and the AF sensor. the AF sensor reads the light from the lens, and focuses accordingly.

in your proposed EVF layout, there is nothing but a lens and an image sensor. there is no dedicated AF sensor, nor is there the ability to fit one in. now i'm not THAT learn-ed on the difference between "phase detection" and "contrast detection" AF, but it was my understanding that phase detection (what's used in my 20D) requires a special sensor, while contrast detection (what's used in a P&S or your 40D's liveview) is the only method which can be used with the main sensor acting as an AF sensor.

so in other words; drop the AF sensor, lose phase-detection-AF, must rely on contrast-detect-AF.

Broadcast TV is really amazing, even at 30 FPS. Any given frame,
pulled out of that stream, can be very blurred. Yet we don't notice
it because we cannot analyze 30 frames per second for sharpness,
really. And we can't when viewing through a viewfinder either.

So the "virtual shutter speed" required by the EVF could be quite
low, just as it can be for any video that is not being analyzed frame
by frame.

So that's all I was saying.

right but my points are that:

1 yes in sequence, 30 fps appears to be a fluid motion. BUT, compared to a REAL person moving, a person on film at 30fps doesn't appear as defined. not even on HDTV.

2 yes, in sequence, 30 fps appears to be af luid motion. BUT the camera still needs a razor sharp image to perform AF functions

The AF system, on the other hand, will still be getting its optical

images directly, the way it always has.

will it? won't there need to be an AF sensor in there to run AF routines? i don't think the main sensor can be: feeding vid to the EVF, performing AF and metering, AND take pictures all at the same time. can it? (heck, even out 20-40D cameras have a dedicated light meter)

 

[jpr2]

I know this isn't the correct thread, but I just want jpr2 to know
that I haven't forgotten about the other threads we've got going on.
I've been out of town a lot lately with no good way to follow or
post. I'm home for a few days again, but still probably won't have
enough time to look into doing more flash pulse width testing. And I
do think that it's going to be tough to trigger to catch the ETTL
shots. I also still am interested in trying the new screen you've
been using too. It sounds like a good one to play with. The one
place I tried to get one was out of stock.

Jim,

this is good news (about further possible tests on ETTL durations). Lately
I'm experimenting a lot with the 24ex and 550ex in high sync (II-nd curtain)
for IIFs and SIFs, getting usable durations of at least 1/1000 and shorter,
sometimes even 1/8000 . There seems to be a clear break-even point about
1/1000-1/1600 (but sometimes shifting towards 1/800 or... 1/2500) at which
it is possible to "pump" up to 4-6 shots at 6fps from each of these two
flash units, which just suits me fine. Therefore, if some testing in the spirit
of the ones you did in the past might be possible, I'd be highly interested.

As to the Ec-A - I know about the TW source getting all the time "out of
stock" as several of my friends and shooting buddies are trying to get hold
of this screen too. There is at least one other source: brightscreen.com,
who offers just plain matte screens, without any "adornments". However,
I do not know anything about what kind of surfaces they are using (a
ground-glass type???), and also they products are frightfully expensive -
perhaps due to them being mostly medium format suppliers, and the pricing
schemes are different there. So... the best chance would be to armor
oneself in patience and just try frequently at TW.

Today I tried to shoot macro images as projected on the Ec-A screen.
And it turned out to be about most difficult task I encountered for a
long time. But more due to inadequate means, than any "real" inherent
difficulties - for starters I do not have any decent coupling device to connect
a 40D's OVF, with the lens on a shooting camera. And a "soft coupling",
with an aid of a angled-viewfinder, and some rubber rings is rather clumsy
and almost impossible to align properly. Nevertheless, I'll post some pics.
when/if successful ,

kind regards,
jpr2
--

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/

 

[Bob Blount]

Pro 1 sensor size=8.80 x 6.60 mm
40D sensor size=22.2 x 14.8

Not even close and the same is with the Sony. Where did you hear
they had the same sensor as the 40D?

Read my post again!

--
Bob

'There are always two people in every picture: the photographer and the viewer.' - Ansel Adams

Canon 40D, 70-200mm f4L IS, 28-135mm IS, Sigma 17-70mm f2.8 Macro, 100-400 mm f4.5L IS
Sony R1
Canon Pro1

 

[TANWare]

Hi,

present P&S using EVF's do not utilize a real shutter. You would have to use the same type of system with a DSLR then as well. Even the Live view uses a mechanical system for shutter control.

Other problem then lies in visual accuity. With a through the lens view finder we see predigital conversion the picture as best as we would normally be able to view it. With EVF there is guarented pixelation along with sensor senasativity exposure and assorted other variables in waiting for the camera and EFV to respond.

Now I am not saying one day all of the problem will go away and they will offer real time adjustment that will rival trough the lens but that is a way off. Even then I still would most likely want a mechanical and not electronic shutter.

 

[Dave729]

I want a SLR that satisfies my creative side, but I also want to shoot HD videos and I don't want to lug two devices around. SLR lens capability is so vastly superior to even mid-range prosumer camcorders.

I've heard all the technical challenges, but that's what R&D departments are for -- they'll figure it out, because the first one that does will own the consumer market.

One guy used his 40d to try to simulate video. It is crude, but you can get an idea of what might be possible at this link:

http://www.vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=1034042&server=www.vimeo.com&show_title=1&show_byline=1&show_portrait=0&color=&fullscreen=1 "

 

[Steen Bay]

The 'EVIL' has arrived, and sooner than expected. Well, it wasn't Canon who introduced it (of course!), but Olympus' Micro Four Thirds will do just fine

Will Canon ever give us a 'DSLR' with an Electronic Viewfinder (EVF)?
Something like the Sony R1, but with interchangeable lenses. Of
course it wouldn't tecnically be a 'Single Lens Reflex' camera
anymore, but isn't that an outdated design for a modern digital
camera anyway? Isn't SLRs with mirror vibrations and odd lens design
just a relic from the film days?

Imagine a big sensor (1,6x or FF) camera with a big and bright
electronic viewfinder, with the same resolution as the LCD on Nikon
D300 and (of course) 100% coverage of the frame. In my opinion such a
camera would be much superior to the DSLRs we use today. It would
make it much easier to get the correct framing, focus and exposure.

With my old Pro1 I never used the cameras metering. It wasn't
necessary. In manual mode its EVF worked like the Live View on 40D
with Exposure Simulation enabled. What you see is what you get. In
manual mode I simply changed the exposure until I could SEE that it
was correct, and that's far superior to any metering system. (And it
would be even better with a live view histogram available, which the
Pro1 hadn't.)

And focusing would be better too. Contrast Detect AF is potentially
more accurate than the Phase Detect AF used in DSLRs today, and if
that isn't good enough, then you just magnify the image and use
manual focus. 40D with 10x magnification in Live View has proved how
accurate that can be.

I imagine that such a camera could use the current EF and EF-s
lenses, but to take fully advantage of the new design (without
mirror) it could be necessary to introduce a new line of lenses,
which could be both sharper and more compact, especially when it
comes to wide angle lenses. The only problem that has to be solved is
AF speed, for those that need it (I don't), but P&S cameras with
pretty fast AF already exist, so I'm sure that can be accomplished
too.

Would you buy such a camera? I sure would, without hesitation

 

[Shootin20D]

Just how do you judge light on a screen. It's impossible to do that on the back LCD... how do you want do do it in an EVF?

As you might have seen, the FT gang is coming up w/ something like this...

I'll stick with the outdated concept of slapping mirrors anyway.

Best regards,

Fred

 

[thw]

in order for EVF to be really useful, it needs to have much faster response than what we have now.

Canon and Nikon are really hopeless in terms of innovation.

--------------------------------
A View through my Lens
thw.smugmug.com

 

[mermaidkiller]

I agree as long as manual focus and zooming works by rotating the lens rather than step-by-step repeatedly pushing small buttons like a comtact camera.

I think it will begin in the consumer market (C-1000D / N-D60 class cameras) and I bet that movie taking will allso be part of at least consumer grade SLRs. When Live View works (mirror permanently up) it is also technically possible to make movies.

With an EVF, FF has no advantage.

Disagree, the larger the sensor, the more light it collects and the further the pixels are apart.

Remember the grainy or at least loss-of-detail pictures taken by a 3 or 5MP cellular phone ?
Too many megapixels crammed on a matchhead sized sensor.

Another comparison (my own experience): the 400 ASA night indoor pictures otaken by the Powershot G9 are more grainy than the 1600 ASA pix of the same scene with the 40D.

 

[Sonylover1]

Its just old conservative people that cling to that ancient technique. They will wake up when Oly launch the new series of EVF cameras. I think Sony will join the race also.

Look at this:

Olympus / Panasonic announce Micro Four Thirds:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0808/08080501microfourthirds.asp

I use Sony R1 and Canon 40D - both very good cameras. The EVF is inferior today but have the ability to show what you can expect. And with live Histogram its a killer. The Optical VF gives you a brighter and much more pleasing framing but who says you cant skip the useless flapping mirror that just cause vibration and annoying and disturbing noise?

I will buy the 2nd generation Canon who is a blend of R1/5D and Nikon D700!

Mike

 

[jpr2]

The 'EVIL' has arrived, and sooner than expected. Well, it wasn't
Canon who introduced it (of course!), but Olympus' Micro Four Thirds
will do just fine

I can understand your joy, but it is a far cry from the real thing, if only
for the fact that they kicked out not only OVF, but the very concept
of SLR design - so... maybe good news (perhaps) for the compacts' and
P&S lovers, but has a little bearing here

long live OVF )

jpr2
--

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/

 

[Steen Bay]

The 'EVIL' has arrived, and sooner than expected. Well, it wasn't
Canon who introduced it (of course!), but Olympus' Micro Four Thirds
will do just fine

I can understand your joy, but it is a far cry from the real thing,
if only
for the fact that they kicked out not only OVF, but the very concept
of SLR design - so... maybe good news (perhaps) for the compacts' and
P&S lovers, but has a little bearing here

long live OVF )

Maybe Olympus' 2x sensor is a little small, but apart from that it is the real thing, and my guess is that four years from now you'll be using an EVF, and you'll absolutely love it! ;-)

 

[mattr]

I am a very likely future customer if the focus of system development is compact size (no bulky gimmicks like tilt/swivel LCD) and optically outstanding prime lenses.

That's one of reasons why I think the (first) EVIL system will likely
not come from Canon/Nikon but from Panasonic or Samsung/Pentax.

I think EVIL will definitely come sooner or later and I'm looking
forward to it. The two main issues are viewfinder lag and autofocus.
An optical VF as on the rangefinder cameras can be the solution for
the first issue. The second is more difficult but I'm sure engineers
can come up with a satisfactory solution, even if not quite as good
for moving targets as the phase detection AF in DSLRs.

 

[jpr2]

Maybe Olympus' 2x sensor is a little small, but apart from that it is
the real thing, and my guess is that four years from now you'll be
using an EVF, and you'll absolutely love it! ;-)

I almost bought G9, but discovered in time how noisy and useless
it is even at ISO 400, and above = to change this one would need
new laws of physics concerning noise to signal ratios carried by photons;
long wait for this yet;

thus the above just negates any possible benefits of smaller and lightweight
lenses; but then going up with sensor's size leads us to a well know spiral
again, and having to lug DSLRs around days on end, I'd rather have OVF -
speedy (the speed of light being the actual limit), and color accurate,

than lags and a tunnel vision of EVF - than you = all that was said here
before many, many times over,

good luck and happy shooting with OVFs,
jpr2
--

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/

 

[Karl Gnter Wnsch]

Maybe Olympus' 2x sensor is a little small, but apart from that it is
the real thing, and my guess is that four years from now you'll be
using an EVF, and you'll absolutely love it! ;-)

My guess is this is a passing fad.

It's not a DSLR, it has no autofocus system that should bear the name (just look at the contrast detect AF on the latest live view DSLR from Olympus, Nikon or Canon, this is what you are stuck with on the micro 4/3), the viewfinder lags (everything else is a physical impossibility as is a perpetuum mobile), it sucks the life out of your rechargable as if there is no tomorrow...

--
regards
Karl Günter Wünsch
Visit my gallery at
http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/mypics/461808

 

[plantdoc]

Just take a look at the new release by Olympus. I always suspected that live view was going to lead to the removal of the optical viewing system. Perhaps, if we're lucky we will have a great EVF, but I suspect the movement will be to an LCD only, like most digicams. This also seems similar to the higher end pro-sumer cameras, like the Canon Pro1 and similar that are defunct, but with interchangeable lenses.

Greg

 

[Lee Jay]

Maybe Olympus' 2x sensor is a little small, but apart from that it is
the real thing, and my guess is that four years from now you'll be
using an EVF, and you'll absolutely love it! ;-)

I use it now, and I hate it. It's better than framing by LCD, but far worse than framing by OVF.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 

[Steen Bay]

Maybe Olympus' 2x sensor is a little small, but apart from that it is
the real thing, and my guess is that four years from now you'll be
using an EVF, and you'll absolutely love it! ;-)

I almost bought G9, but discovered in time how noisy and useless
it is even at ISO 400, and above = to change this one would need
new laws of physics concerning noise to signal ratios carried by
photons;
long wait for this yet;

thus the above just negates any possible benefits of smaller and
lightweight
lenses; but then going up with sensor's size leads us to a well know
spiral
again, and having to lug DSLRs around days on end, I'd rather have
OVF -
speedy (the speed of light being the actual limit), and color accurate,

than lags and a tunnel vision of EVF - than you = all that was said here
before many, many times over,

good luck and happy shooting with OVFs,
jpr2

I don't quite understand why you are talking about noise and P&S cameras.. The new 'Micro Four Thirds' has the same sensor-size (2x crop) as Olympus DSLR's today, and it's only a matter of time before you can get a 1,5/1,6x or FF 'EVIL' camera, if that's what you want.

(Oh no, you don't, I forgot, sorry )

 

[jpr2]

I don't quite understand why you are talking about noise and P&S
cameras.. The new 'Micro Four Thirds' has the same sensor-size (2x
crop) as Olympus DSLR's today, and it's only a matter of time before
you can get a 1,5/1,6x or FF 'EVIL' camera, if that's what you want.

...whether Oly,PanaLeica, etc. would be EVER able to squeeze a decent
low light performance out of their 4/3 tiny sensor - hence... P&S, as the
noise at ISO 400++ stays comparable - believe me, I was very tempted
by the very smallness of e420 (and also considered E3, but low noise
at high ISO is not there either), alas... without some crucial performance
in few important areas, it is going to by yet another paper weight:

• quick and critically accurate AF system (Karl Guenther is spot on about

slowness of contrast-detect systems, they might be more accurate, but
quick they aren't, and never will);

• very good low light performance, and by this I mean no compromises ;

• no-lag, accurate VF, which in my book can only be delivered by OVF,

again no compromises ;

• LOW noise, and heating sensor in LV mode is certainly not helping there;

• and finally (in that order) LOW WEIGHT and SMALLNESS - I'd really love

nothing better, than to have a full 1Ds4 capabilities packed into something
of a size/weight of the XSi, or even the e420, but never at a cost of
compromises concerning any of the above;

perhaps, with current progress in electronics, lightweight materials, and
optics too, we might finally get there, but... maybe not in my lifetime
yet,

jpr2
--

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/

 

[Steve Balcombe]

Maybe Olympus' 2x sensor is a little small, but apart from that it is
the real thing, and my guess is that four years from now you'll be
using an EVF, and you'll absolutely love it! ;-)

I knew people would start digging up these old EVF/EVIL threads but there is a danger of missing the point of the micro 4/3 announcement if we see it from an SLR perspective and concentrate too much on the viewfinder capability. The cameras which will use this system will not be miniature DSLR replacements. They will be compacts with a huge sensor and interchangeable lenses. Look at that mount registration distance - 20 mm!! (Canon's EF is 44 mm, 4/3 is 40 mm.) That is going to make it easy to produce an f/2.8 or better 6-8x zoom with a decent wide angle of 28 mm equivalent or maybe, hopefully, 24 mm. Which you can swap out for a tiny 3x zoom to make a pocketable camera with IQ to beat every compact on the market.

Think of it not as a crippled DSLR, but as a compact camera to die for.