Is an Electronic Viewfinder Appropriate for an A7xx?

WilsonsLandscapes said:

aye Walt, it inevitable friend. how hard did you resist your first Digital SLR?

Click to expand...

My first DSLR was the RD-175, more than 15 years ago. I've been exclusively DSLR longer than the majority here. Resist? I've been on the forefront...

I've had plenty of inevitable in photography. I adapt, but that does not mean I have to like less capable choices.

WilsonsLandscapes said:

we all need friends like you i guess, keep things in check so it doesn't go too far.

Click to expand...

Need people who think things through to see where it's going. Not just behave like a bunch of lemmings running over a cliff.

WilsonsLandscapes said:

i do joke on the inside though and envision you smoking a pipe in a rocking chair keeping your old rangefinder close by in its own custom case and throwing darts at a picture of the aNEX camera.

Click to expand...

No rocking chair here, closest thing would be my Greenspeed Touring trike, which is very comfortable on long tours. I'm old enough now I could start smoking a pipe and the cancer would not have enough time to get me before I die of other causes. No plans to take up smoking, however. I'm actually a cancer survivor (prostate cancer removed a few years ago, today just received the latest lab results that say it's still gone, it's many years before they declare you cured). Somewhere around here gathering dust there might be a old rangefinder but like everything film its not used. And if you want small, I have a top end Minox around here somewhere. But I've been shooting SLR and then DSLR since the early 50's. I was doing expert level scientific photography by the 60's.

If they manage to come out with a NEX with a proper Minolta hot shoe flash control including wireless (and my macro ringflash), fix the UI, and make it a proper system with a better range of longer E-mount lenses and E-mount macro I may very well end up with one for limited types of use like my bike touring. I'm far from against it within it's niche which is about the same as bridge cameras. For now I bought a Sony HX1 for that niche rather than the current NEX.

WilsonsLandscapes said:

for me long as the results are same or better i'll accept it

Click to expand...

Folks keep saying that in another 5-10 years EVF might catch up with OVF, but a camera brought out today won't have that future EVF, it will have the much poorer EVF of today. And people have been saying that 5-10 years for at least the last 15 years without it getting any closer. The chances of same or better in advanced shooting I do are close to nil.

Walt

dr jim said:

My question for you Tom, is, do you feel the fact that you are using an EFV rather than an optical VF actually impacts negatively,your ability to take photographs? Or is it a matter of a optical view finder is just plain more pleasant to look at.

Click to expand...

The EVF isolates you farther from your subject than a OVF does. It's more of a interference to composition. I want to relate to the subject both before I put camera to eye with my own eyes and continue doing that while looking through the OVF. It's the subject we are photographing and emotionally forming a relationship to and the OVF does a far better job at this. Not some picture of the subject which is all you get with EVF.

Walt

markymark101 said:

I've got no problem with something like the Nex or a pellicle camera having EVF, the design mandates it - but a traditional, high end DSLR, gotta have OVF.

Click to expand...

At this point the question is if Sony will support the OVF DSLRs for still photography as well with their R&D. Right now it does not appear so. That is a very critical issue as Sony has been known plenty of times to neglect products to death.

Walt

"No EVF - even the GH1 - handles backlit subjects well. I tried one in a camera store recently and tried t compose a shot with someone inside the store standing near a window. I could see the person, or I could see the street outside, but not both at the same time. The DR of EVFs is pathetic. Strike two. "

Sorry, I haven't figured out this whole quote thing. Anyway, this could be seen as either a good or bad thing. The truth of the matter is that the shot you were trying to take had too much dynamic range. You wouldn't see this looking through an optical viewfinder, but the EVF gives you a pretty good representation of what the final exposure will look like with your current settings. If it's going to blow out, you might want to know that in advance. With an optical VF you won't know untill you see the image after it's shot, instead of before. Just a thought

Just for fun!

Jim

Mike CH said:

Advantages of the OVF, depending on usage pattern, would be something like: fast (speed of light fast), no smearing, predictable behaviour in low light, ...

Click to expand...

Much more direct connection to the subject on a emotional level. Very critical for quality composition.

Mike CH said:

Advantages of the EVF (assumed, since we haven't got the faintest idea so far): more information (histogram, WB, ...), zoom, 100%, ...

Click to expand...

These "advantages" all place more between you and your subject, emotionally disconnecting you from the subject of your photography. Without that connection photos will tend to be dead.

Of course if that's what people want......

Mike CH said:

I'd prefer my DSLR without video, thank you.
I know it has uses, but not for me.

Click to expand...

Like EVF not a choice we will be allowed to have....

Walt

I still have a KM A2 and a Alfa 700. Sometimes I would wish the 700 had an EVF: Easy to activate angle OVF, life histogramm, bright picture in low light conditions, exactly 100% and also what's now called life view (LCD). Additionally one can control the cam from the laptop or pc remotely wih exception of the zoom which has to be adjusted manually. Important for me are brightness and resolution (at least 1 Megapixel).

dr jim said:

Sorry, I haven't figured out this whole quote thing. Anyway, this could be seen as either a good or bad thing. The truth of the matter is that the shot you were trying to take had too much dynamic range. You wouldn't see this looking through an optical viewfinder, but the EVF gives you a pretty good representation of what the final exposure will look like with your current settings. If it's going to blow out, you might want to know that in advance. With an optical VF you won't know untill you see the image after it's shot, instead of before. Just a thought

Click to expand...

You might not know it, but I will, and so will every other pro and advanced shooter around. We are talking advanced shooters here with the a7xx, not beginners shooting in green auto. We will know it and have set correct exposure before even putting viewfinder to eye.

Get yourself a good book on exposure or take a class, start learning advanced shooting. Having to see the final exposed shot in the LCD to shoot is a beginner's crutch that one can grow out of.

Walt

Working with my old KM A2 I always use the EVF as long as I can put the eye on it. Its simply because I can fix it better to the body to avoid shake. I make a lot of shots in low light conditions, and there the long arm method would produce well shaked shots.

In 2007 I did most of my work with the A100 (not much more sensitive than the A2). One day I went into an exhibition and took the old A2 for that purpose. I was surprised how easy and fast my work proceeded (300 shots), much better than with the A100. And IQ was not sooo different.

The problem: I assume that a good EVF is more expensive than an OVF ! Remember the 'development' from KM A2 to A200.

I do think the OVF will be outclassed by the EVF in the near future. Electronics get better each day. ther is hardly anything that can make the best OVF better. The EVF otoh has come a long way and will have a long way to go before it is as good or better then the best OVF.

TheEVF is in some ways better then an OVF though. You can see menus on it, you can have histograms on it, it is 100% etc.

The down site is that the resolution is not great, it can be slow esp. in low light, it uses a lot more energy!

So to come to your question about an EVF for an A7xx type of camera: My answefr has to be: not yet!

Guess I've been told.
--
Just for fun!

Jim

WaltKnapp said:

I'm actually a cancer survivor (prostate cancer removed a few years ago, today just received the latest lab results that say it's still gone, it's many years before they declare you cured).

Click to expand...

Excellent - congratulations man. Much as we disagree, brilliant news!

WaltKnapp said:

If they manage to come out with a NEX with a proper Minolta hot shoe flash control including wireless (and my macro ringflash), fix the UI, and make it a proper system with a better range of longer E-mount lenses and E-mount macro I may very well end up with one for limited types of use like my bike touring. I'm far from against it within it's niche which is about the same as bridge cameras. For now I bought a Sony HX1 for that niche rather than the current NEX.

Click to expand...

This is progress

All the best!

dr jim said:

"No EVF - even the GH1 - handles backlit subjects well. I tried one in a camera store recently and tried t compose a shot with someone inside the store standing near a window. I could see the person, or I could see the street outside, but not both at the same time. The DR of EVFs is pathetic. Strike two. "

Sorry, I haven't figured out this whole quote thing. Anyway, this could be seen as either a good or bad thing. The truth of the matter is that the shot you were trying to take had too much dynamic range. You wouldn't see this looking through an optical viewfinder, but the EVF gives you a pretty good representation of what the final exposure will look like with your current settings. If it's going to blow out, you might want to know that in advance. With an optical VF you won't know untill you see the image after it's shot, instead of before. Just a thought

Click to expand...

Well, if you're shooting JPEG, that may be true. RAW has at least four full stops more DR than JPEG, and can capture most of a scene like this. Suppose that the building across the street is part of my composition, and because of the blown out EVF I can't see that a bus has just pulled up in front of that building. Or because the street outside is rendered properly I can't see that the individual inside is scowling and giving me the finger.

If all you ever want is camera-processed JPEG an EVF would probably suit you. There is a whole population of photographers out there who don't find EVF acceptable, and most of those say it's fine if some cameras start to come with EVF for the folks that want it. Why do so many people who want EVFs try to talk others out of wanting OVFs?

And what does the camera produce ? Just a picture of the object (like the EVF) !

goetz48 said:

And what does the camera produce ? Just a picture of the object (like the EVF) !

Click to expand...

Yes, but instead of a crappy, grainy 8-bit representation it produces a 12(or more) bit, high-resolution representation of the composition.

Also the camera does not produce a smeared, stuttering representation of the object you want to capture as it moves(unless you choose that with shutter speed). You're free to make your own mistakes -- choose an EVF if you want -- but I'd rather switch mounts than have the "choice" forced on me. EVF technology is NOT advancing with Moore's law, whatever people may want to think.

Afer reading all the above I can only come to one conclusion. Different folks, different strokes! Some a totally sold on NEX type only with LCD and have no use for any VF. Others want the EVF for reason stated above. Some of us like the clear, concise image of a good OVF as found in my A700. Actually all choices are on the market and we can buy what we want. Please leave it that way!!

Actually OVF have improved over the years. I gave up my SRT 101 because my aging eyes couldn't see focus changes in moderate to low light with a zoom lens. I went to 7000i with autofocus to solve problem and found the improved OVF let focus snap in even when on manual focus. The A700 gives this same sharp view. I have not seen a EVF or LCD where I can see this without using magnification, which loses the overall image so please don't take my option away.

Paul W said:

Paul W UK said:

If they manage to come out with a NEX with a proper Minolta hot shoe flash control including wireless (and my macro ringflash), fix the UI, and make it a proper system with a better range of longer E-mount lenses and E-mount macro I may very well end up with one for limited types of use like my bike touring. I'm far from against it within it's niche which is about the same as bridge cameras. For now I bought a Sony HX1 for that niche rather than the current NEX.

Click to expand...

This is progress

Click to expand...

Not really, I came to those conclusions shortly after the NEX was introduced. I had kind of hoped it would be a bit more developed than it turned out to be. Still watching it's progress (or not as the case may be), the HX1 is doing fine for that niche now.

Walt

Dave_Anderson said:

goetz48 said:

And what does the camera produce ? Just a picture of the object (like the EVF) !

Click to expand...

Yes, but instead of a crappy, grainy 8-bit representation it produces a 12(or more) bit, high-resolution representation of the composition.

Also the camera does not produce a smeared, stuttering representation of the object you want to capture as it moves(unless you choose that with shutter speed). You're free to make your own mistakes -- choose an EVF if you want -- but I'd rather switch mounts than have the "choice" forced on me. EVF technology is NOT advancing with Moore's law, whatever people may want to think.

Click to expand...

My point, about the purpose of photography and connecting with our subjects was obviously lost. I guess I'm not surprised.

Walt

gfrensen said:

I do think the OVF will be outclassed by the EVF in the near future. Electronics get better each day. ther is hardly anything that can make the best OVF better. The EVF otoh has come a long way and will have a long way to go before it is as good or better then the best OVF.

Click to expand...

So it's going to be real soon now and a long way off at the same time? Maybe you need to inject a little realism. It will be forced on us real soon now, but it won't be a quality viewfinder.

gfrensen said:

TheEVF is in some ways better then an OVF though. You can see menus on it, you can have histograms on it, it is 100% etc.

Click to expand...

Enough so there is a full barrier between you and the subject. That is one of the worst characteristics of EVF as implemented.

The point of the photo is the subject and how you relate to it. And communication of that relationship to the viewer of your photos. All that garbage is just in the way of good photography.

Walt

dlkeller said:

Afer reading all the above I can only come to one conclusion. Different folks, different strokes! Some a totally sold on NEX type only with LCD and have no use for any VF. Others want the EVF for reason stated above. Some of us like the clear, concise image of a good OVF as found in my A700. Actually all choices are on the market and we can buy what we want. Please leave it that way!!

Click to expand...

Unfortunately it's clear choice is not an option. Especially when you consider where R&D resources are applied. OVF will be neglected to death, that's already happening.

Walt