Reading mode: Light Dark

Who uses the OVF (that’s optical viewfinder)?

Go to last post
from the age of dinosaurs, an electronic signal can't travel through a wire as fast as the speed of light. At this point, I can foresee other objections being remediated reasonably well, but the speed issue will be the very last one to fall, if ever.

I'm too old and canny to say 'never', but this ought to be about as close as we can get to never.

--

Don't feel too vindicated if I happen to agree with you today. Chances are we will disagree tomorrow. . .

Now that you've judged the quality of my typing, take a look at my photos. . .
http://glenbarrington.smugmug.com/
http://www.jpgmag.com/people/glenbarrington/photos
 
Glen Barrington said:
from the age of dinosaurs, an electronic signal can't travel through a wire as fast as the speed of light. At this point, I can foresee other objections being remediated reasonably well, but the speed issue will be the very last one to fall, if ever.
Click to expand...
Light is very much slowed down by passing through glass prisms, too. Considering how often the rays RE-pass through the same prism, such retadation might very well reach the same level of significance as electrons through wires.... (errr.. not much?)
--
Regards,
Baz

"Ahh... But the thing is, they were not just ORDINARY time travellers!"
 
pointshooter said:
Last week I went to a retirement party for a friend. There were two professional photographers in attendance. They each had access to the latest and greatest photographic equipment, but on this occasion each whipped out a tiny point and shoot and began taking the obligatory shots for posterity.

I just got off the Canon product tour for the T2i (550D). They had lots to say about the LCD, but nothing about the OVF.

What’s my question, or, perhaps my point? Does anyone use the OVF on their DSLR? The textbooks say the purpose of an SLR is to preview the subject (focus, compose, etc.) through the same glass used to record the image. This is done periscopically through the OVF and mirror, not the LCD.

Is the DSLR an anachronism from the film camera days?
Click to expand...
 
. . . that the speed of light in glass or the speed of electrons in copper is what we are talking about! The real problem is that it takes time for the sensor, data acquisition system and data processor to turn light falling onto the sensor into a usable image. We are talking many milliseconds of capture and conversion time versus nanoseconds of light and/or signal transmission time.

Having said that, in my career I have seen the speed of common data acquisition systems go up by two or three orders of magnitude. Image processor performance has improved much, much more than that. It is not inconceivable to me that an EVF will approach the performance of an OVF within a few years. If that doesn't happen, I will either continue to buy DSLRs or use the equipment I already own.
 
Cedarhill said:
The real problem is that it takes time for the sensor, data acquisition system and data processor to turn light falling onto the sensor into a usable image.
Click to expand...
And, in low-light, the time it takes for the sensor to accumulate enough photons captured to be able to produce a usable image.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
--Well this has been bandied about a lot. DSLR OVFs rely on a flapping mirror and the stopping down of the aperature. Electrons are pretty quick in comparison. OVF's have been with us for a long time and won't get any better. EVF's are quite new and improving to a point where the best ones can almost compete with the DSLR OVF. A few little focus/ latency issues to overcome but almost there. I give it 2 years.
Don V. Armitage
 
ljfinger said:
Leonard Migliore said:
But I already noted your concern about present-day EVF's; it's the same as mine. The EVF will not replace the OVF until it's just about as fast and allows similarly fast autofocus. I believe, however, that this is going to happen just because lots of smart people are working on it.
Click to expand...
That's not a good reason to believe it's going to happen. Lots (and lots, and lots, and lots) of really smart people have been working on controlled thermal nuclear fusion for 50 years and it hasn't happened yet. It's simply a really hard problem where the fundamental physics are against you. That's why the most promising approaches being worked on now (inertial) for controlled fusion don't use the thermal approach. Thermal = contrast detect AF/EVF where the fundamental physics is against you. Inertial = phase detect AF/OVF where the fundamental physics is more in your favor.
Click to expand...
Gimme a break. We are not trying to manipulate the fundamental forces of the universe here. I do not believe that improving the performance of electronic viewfinders is anywhere near as complex as controlling nuclear fusion. I mean, we have EVF's, they work. We have contrast detection focus, it works. We don't have to break new ground in fundamental physics, we just have to make things work faster. And things have been working faster and faster for the last 40 years in the electronics industry.

So I am reasonably confident that the engineering problems that currently limit the performance of electronic viewfinders will be solved relatively soon. And if they're not, I'll continue using the highly-engineered nightmare of the moving mirror.

--
Leonard Migliore
 
I agree that EVFs have the potential to be better than OVF (just improve resolution and speed) - mainly because you can see the actual exposure before the shot, with useful information overlaid on top. But the original question was about EVFs vs. the rear LCD - fine for quick snaps, but not good enough for serious use (unless using a tripod) - which is why I haven't bought an S95.
--
Jeff Peterman

Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
http://www.pbase.com/jeffp25
http://www.jeffp25.smugmug.com

 
hdr said:
Roger99 said:
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without necessarily accepting it. -Aristotle
...oh, and I see by the lack of responses that I am right yet again.
Click to expand...
You may wish to visualize that future phone-cams may come with full-frame sensors and interchangeable lenses as standard. Think EVIL phones-cams.
Click to expand...
My exaggerated point was more that when I can no longer get a reasonable OVF (which is getting closer and closer looking at the trend) I will give up on photography. Well digital photography anyway. Saw a really nice 6x6 medium format the other day going real cheap. Eye level finder. So wonderfully manual.

--

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without necessarily accepting it. -Aristotle

...oh, and I see by the lack of responses that I am right yet again.
 
Jeff Peterman said:
I agree that EVFs have the potential to be better than OVF (just improve resolution and speed) - mainly because you can see the actual exposure before the shot, with useful information overlaid on top. But the original question was about EVFs vs. the rear LCD - fine for quick snaps, but not good enough for serious use (unless using a tripod) - which is why I haven't bought an S95.
--
Click to expand...
From the original post starting this thread:

What’s my question, or, perhaps my point? Does anyone use the OVF on their DSLR? The textbooks say the purpose of an SLR is to preview the subject (focus, compose, etc.) through the same glass used to record the image. This is done periscopically through the OVF and mirror, not the LCD.

--
Leonard Migliore
 
I haven't really used the back screen on my ep2 for framing since I got the snap-on evf. It's not just that holding the camera to the eye is a steadier position, that I'm used to doing so from having an slr, or that the evf on the pen is much better than the rear screen. The key thing is by holding the viewer to the eye it takes up a large part of your field of view and you can actually see what you're shooting.

I find the olympus evf2 to be much brighter and easier to use than the (admittedly, not very good) optical finder on my canon 350d dslr. That I can have it zoom in at the press of a button for manual fine-focus is just the icing. If an electronic viewfinder is better now than a low-end slr finder, then I have no doubt at all that optical viewfinders will go the way of wind-on levers in the next five years.

Getting rid of a eye-piece viewfinder completely though - no way! Evfs have WIDENED the gap between eye-level finders and trying to use the screen on the back.
 
"I just got off the Canon product tour for the T2i (550D). They had lots to say about the LCD, but nothing about the OVF. "

From the full context of the post, including his statement about how the "professionals" were holding up P&S models, it's clear he wasn't thinking about EVFs (and woould have included them with OVFs).
--
Jeff Peterman

Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
http://www.pbase.com/jeffp25
http://www.jeffp25.smugmug.com

 
Leonard Migliore said:
Gimme a break. We are not trying to manipulate the fundamental forces of the universe here. I do not believe that improving the performance of electronic viewfinders is anywhere near as complex as controlling nuclear fusion. I mean, we have EVF's, they work. We have contrast detection focus, it works. We don't have to break new ground in fundamental physics, we just have to make things work faster.
Click to expand...
To make contrast detect as fast as SLRs were over 10 years ago, the efficiency of the approach will have to improve by a factor of 10 to 100, or the efficiency of sensors will have to improve by the same amount (impossible). In addition, we'll have to be able to move and stop the physical focusing systems of lenses faster than we do now by a factor of 10 or more.

I don't believe either one is an attainable goal.

EVF lag could be reduced somewhat arbitrarily in good light, but in low light we still have a very long way to go there - another factor of 10 or so. I don't believe that one is an attainable goal either.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
I don't think it is an anachronism, I use it every time I use my 550D even though I could use Live View instead. Hang over from my film camera days of course but I like to compose the shot through the viewfinder. At least I can read the tech. data for the shoot. Live View seems to be nearly useless in bright light conditions. Has anyone solved how to SEE the LCD screen image outdoors???
 
pointshooter said:
An excellent, textbook reply, and many other responses on this thread have contributed to my understanding.

My digital experience has been confined to a series of point-and-shoots culminating last year with a Canon G11. I am spoiled by LCD technology and am just not sure how an aging pair of eyes would adapt to a keyhole OVF.
Click to expand...
It is my aging eyes that sent me back to using OVF. One of the two main reasons I keep to a DSLR is the viewfinder. One of the main reasons for my G10 was the finder, frustrating little pinhole that it is, it is still essential to me for about half the shots I take.

These days the only time I seem to truly and freely enjoy the operation of a camera is when I dust off my old Nikon SLR with it's bright, huge "Vistavison" window of a viewfinder where I can contemplate every detail of the results of all the variables and really pre-visualize the photo.

An LCD definitely has it's day to day uses but squinting at it's dim image in daylight and straining to see settings overlays etc. can get a bit much. Having to consider how I position the camera for both composition and capability to see the LCD is just kinda wrong. When I am in the "zone" a good OVF is a must.

--

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without necessarily accepting it. -Aristotle

...oh, and I see by the lack of responses that I am right yet again.
 
Why use knife and fork when we could just get a tube inserted?

All that pesky chewing and tasting and texture feeling and swallowing.

Cutlery is just so last century. Technology could save us so much trouble.

--

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without necessarily accepting it. -Aristotle

...oh, and I see by the lack of responses that I am right yet again.
 
dona2 said:
--Well this has been bandied about a lot. DSLR OVFs rely on a flapping mirror and the stopping down of the aperature. Electrons are pretty quick in comparison.
Click to expand...
My G10 still has to stop down the aperture, set the auto focus, do the auto colour balance, image stabilize, take the shot, write it to the buffer, process it, compress it and pass it to the memory card. The flapping mirror seems to be of little consequence. Even dropping most of these settings still gives me enough lag to get me reaching for the DSLR to get better response.
DonA2 said:
OVF's have been with us for a long time and won't get any better.
Click to expand...
They didn't need to, if anything they are getting worse. As I always harp on about digital made them throw the baby out with the bath water.
DonA2 said:
EVF's are quite new and improving to a point where the best ones can almost compete with the DSLR OVF. A few little focus/ latency issues to overcome but almost there. I give it 2 years.
Click to expand...
DonA2 said:
Don V. Armitage
Click to expand...
--

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without necessarily accepting it. -Aristotle

...oh, and I see by the lack of responses that I am right yet again.
 
I might use the LCD on a tripod, special circumstances. Aside from that, who would use it? It's kind of for beginners.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
X-Pro4 thoughts
2 3
Replies
52
Views
13K
John Gellings
John Gellings
JimKasson
Why we own cameras, and why it matters
2 3
Replies
42
Views
143K
Rob de Loe
Rob de Loe
Rambow
DSLRs were the culmination of camera technology
6 7 8
Replies
144
Views
14K
Bill Ferris
Bill Ferris
mistercat
First astrophotography attempt: a few questions
2
Replies
20
Views
9K
Alen K
Alen K
primeshooter
Z8 initial impressions from a landscape and astro guy
2 3
Replies
47
Views
32K
primeshooter
primeshooter

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top