I am looking at x100's hybrid view finder. Given that the electronic view finder is also at eye level through the view finder (and not just at the rear LCD) ... and that it transmits all information at 100% and fixes parallex ... my question is: why bother using OVF? I mean why make it hybrid instead of just EVF that acts and feels like OVF?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
x100 - why use the optical view finder ...
- Thread starter uwbrother
- Start date
Michael Kaufman
Senior Member
For one thing, I have never seen an EVF that was usable at night. When the light gets low, they all get very grainy. For another, an OVF is generally brighter and refreshes faster then an EVF. Also, I imagine the battery will last longer with the OVF.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelthek/
dmartin92
Senior Member
Thanks for your comments, Michael. I was wondering about this too. Thanks.
But just teasing, I ask, about how much faster does the OVF go than the EVF ?
It would seem to me the answer is: "somewhere around the speed of light"
Michael Perham
Senior Member
EV has a bit of a delay ...just check out any on your existing camera. Optical viewfinders on the other hand allow you to move your view quickly and are much better when you have any action.
--
http://www.mikespentaxianblog.blogspot.com/
agh, are you kidding?! rake him over the coals!
as previously mentioned, the galilean viewfinder is very bright, even in low light, and shows action in real time without lag. it also provides a view that is absolutely crystal clear at all distances and times. your vision is unobstructed by what is out of focus, as it is on an slr or evil, and there is no mirror or shutter blackout so you actually "see the moment" you've just photographed. it also shows what is outside of the frame, either something that is about to move into the frame, or something that can be included with slight recomposition. these features make it the viewfinder of choice for many photographers who do candid or street photography, or photojournalism.
as previously mentioned, the galilean viewfinder is very bright, even in low light, and shows action in real time without lag. it also provides a view that is absolutely crystal clear at all distances and times. your vision is unobstructed by what is out of focus, as it is on an slr or evil, and there is no mirror or shutter blackout so you actually "see the moment" you've just photographed. it also shows what is outside of the frame, either something that is about to move into the frame, or something that can be included with slight recomposition. these features make it the viewfinder of choice for many photographers who do candid or street photography, or photojournalism.
Speed of light is getting pretty slow these days ...It would seem to me the answer is: "somewhere around the speed of light"
I don't know excatly why but difference is usually quite noticeable ...
mercedes_sl1970
Member
Having grown up on optical viewfinders, I am yet to find an electro gizmo thingo viewfinder that comes anywhere near to the clarity of viewing through glass. In my view, you just cannot beat it.
walter marshall
Leading Member
Viramati
Senior Member
It's not TTL so you wont see DOF but you can if you switch it to EVF. You may need to zoom but even so it may be too small to matter anyway.
...
...
Mainly because the composition process is different in a viewfinder than it in in a SLR (or other camera with TTL viewing.)
With a viewfinder what I find myself doing is viewing everything and deliberately choosing the fraction of the vista that will be captured as the image. This is a different decision-making process than I perform when seeing exactly what the sensor will see. You can see what's outside of the frame, which means you can watch how things are developing, time things better, and (possibly) capture stronger images that you would with a TTL viewing system.
You can also see the scene exactly as it looks when the shutter fired to know whether you got the shot or not.
Or at least, that's my reason for favoring a rangefinder. I simply shoot differently when viewing the world through one.
--
Derek
With a viewfinder what I find myself doing is viewing everything and deliberately choosing the fraction of the vista that will be captured as the image. This is a different decision-making process than I perform when seeing exactly what the sensor will see. You can see what's outside of the frame, which means you can watch how things are developing, time things better, and (possibly) capture stronger images that you would with a TTL viewing system.
You can also see the scene exactly as it looks when the shutter fired to know whether you got the shot or not.
Or at least, that's my reason for favoring a rangefinder. I simply shoot differently when viewing the world through one.
--
Derek
polarabbit
Senior Member
because OVF is still brighter than EVF and the latter is mostly not as usable at night. also traditionally RF users are used to framing using OVF and the X100 is clearly targeted at traditional RF users looking for a relatively low cost digital alternative or second camera.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GALLERY: http://galay.fotki.com
Gary
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GALLERY: http://galay.fotki.com
Gary
Photohobbyfun
Senior Member
I've heard that a good evf can be better in lowlight than an ovf because the evf can turn up brightness. I think we wil just have to wait for the reviews to see how good the viewfinders are. It should be an interesting battle given the pluses and minuses of each.
walter marshall
Leading Member
The EVF does go brighter but it tends to be sort of dull bright and gets very grainy and messy in low light, the OVF is clear as the proverbial bell.
I believe that EVF are getting better but I have not looked through some of the current manifestations.
Walter
I agree completely. I have no time for cameras that are missing an optical view finder. Even worse are point and shoots that force people to hold cameras at arms length to compose shots and should be outlawed, if only because people look ridiculous doing it. Fuji could have left the EVF out and still had my attention with this one.
The Panda
Leading Member
trust your eyes more than a screen
--
-Chris Pandoliano
http://www.pandaism.com
http://www.twitter.com/ThePanda61
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thepanda/
--
-Chris Pandoliano
http://www.pandaism.com
http://www.twitter.com/ThePanda61
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thepanda/
Jeff Charles
Veteran Member
I think it has to do with what we are used to. I used optical viewfinders for many years before learning to shoot small cameras with LCDs. With elbows braced against my sides, I can hold the camera at least as steady as my DSLR against my face. I still prefer an optical viewfinder, but an LCD is very usable.
The biggest advantage of the optical viewfinder for me is the lack of delay. With an LCD, and I'd guess with an EVF, what you see on the screen is very slightly delayed. It is enough to miss a fleeting facial expression, at least with the ones I've used. When I use an LCD to photograph people, I frame with the LCD, but look directly at the subject to decide when to take the picture. With an optical viewfinder, assuming that you've acquired focus, there is no perceptible delay.
--
Jeff
My cat, who likes to sprawl on my keyboard, is responsible for all typos, misspellings, factual errors, and faulty logic in my posts.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum