-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Viewfinder OMD has same magnification
- Thread starter Thomas_A
- Start date
-
- Tags
- olympus e-5
AV Janus
Senior Member
That is sad. No "epoch" level event here, although overlays could be useful if they are part of manual focus zoom assist... :-/
How much is the magnification?
--
Rick Halle wrote:
" Keep in mind that tall buildings sway back and forth so they require faster shutter speeds."
How much is the magnification?
--
Rick Halle wrote:
" Keep in mind that tall buildings sway back and forth so they require faster shutter speeds."
Macx
Senior Member
According to 43rumours approximately 0.92x at finder style 1 and 2 and 1.15x at finder style 3 with a 50mm lens focussing at infinity. This is similar to the VF-2 specs. It's still not official information, mind you.
Entropius
Senior Member
Is this magnification scaled for crop factor or not?
Gregm61
Forum Pro
....which I have a hard time finding anything to complain about. I know some will complain about anything and everything, but the VF-2 is a pretty darn good finder I can certainly live with.
kenw
Veteran Member
OP doesn't quite explain clearly.
OM-D same magnification as a VF-2, which is about the same as an APS-C OVF.
Compared to the GH2/G3 which is about the same as a FF OVF.
Not bad, but sort of lame given the benefit of an EVF is that it can be large. And if this thing is suppose to be "OM" like then it should really have had the giant dreamy OM VF magnification.
And lets not let this devolve into another "hump" discussion
--
Ken W
See plan in profile for equipment list
OM-D same magnification as a VF-2, which is about the same as an APS-C OVF.
Compared to the GH2/G3 which is about the same as a FF OVF.
Not bad, but sort of lame given the benefit of an EVF is that it can be large. And if this thing is suppose to be "OM" like then it should really have had the giant dreamy OM VF magnification.
And lets not let this devolve into another "hump" discussion
--
Ken W
See plan in profile for equipment list
This could be a deal breaker for me. I switched to m4/3 because for the first time finder image size (magnification) was independant from body size and sensor size. The G1 to GH2 had a VF of similar size of a FF camera !
The Olympus DSLRs (except the larger E-5 and E-30) never appealed to me, because of the small, tunnel vision, and dark view finders.
I hope that the EM-5 view finder isn't again a step back into the wrong direction. With the small size requirements of the PENs it was somehow understandbale: the VF2 should not be any bigger. However, with a body concept like the EM-5, there is room for a finder with better magnification.
If the finder is really smaller than that of the GH2, I would be really p..d off, and Olympus again missed a big opportunity. The finder is the most important part of the camera/photographer interface. A big fail in this discipline, would be a big bummer.
Thomas
The Olympus DSLRs (except the larger E-5 and E-30) never appealed to me, because of the small, tunnel vision, and dark view finders.
I hope that the EM-5 view finder isn't again a step back into the wrong direction. With the small size requirements of the PENs it was somehow understandbale: the VF2 should not be any bigger. However, with a body concept like the EM-5, there is room for a finder with better magnification.
If the finder is really smaller than that of the GH2, I would be really p..d off, and Olympus again missed a big opportunity. The finder is the most important part of the camera/photographer interface. A big fail in this discipline, would be a big bummer.
--
Thomas
The usual numbers given are not crop-adjusted. So 1.15 x = VF-2. 0.92 x is probably because masking out parts of the display to use for information (= classical OM series, E- series with OVF). Odd enuogh I read that the old OM was 0.92x but I am afraid that the OM-D is only 0.46 x (VF-1, 2 mode) or 0.58 (VF-3 mode) when crop-adjusted. Whichi is a bit dissapointing. Panasonic is 0.7x, and Olympus should be able to do at least that with such a good display.
I totally agree that a decent magnification is very important for the feel and usability of the view-finder. Although the 1.15 x or 0.58 x crop-adjusted is not bad, I would not like smaller. Removing the overlays is a good option (having information outside the view), but 0.92 x (0.46 x) is the same as the tunnel-like view of e.g. E-420.
The display is good, and it should allow for a higher magnification. It's a pity, when they had the opportunity to rework it.
The display is good, and it should allow for a higher magnification. It's a pity, when they had the opportunity to rework it.
Mattersburger
Well-known member
If I select something other than 4:3, does the viewfinder crop to that aspect ratio?
Yes with my G1. If I select aspect ratio 16:9, I have the same ratio in EVF, if I select 2:3, I have it in EVF
--
I’m surprised how much Wikipedia contributes to the forum.
I do not understand the whole subject of your disappointment. What is bad about magnification? What have you learnt about magnification?
For me this is total nonsense.
--
I’m surprised how much Wikipedia contributes to the forum.
The viewfinder is the same as the VF2, with a 35mm-equivalent magnification of 0.58x. The G3 and GH2 have 0.7x. For the original OM-1 it was about 0.9x.
For some people this is irrelevant (people's preferences do differ a lot: it's a great thing that there are so many different models from different manufacturers...) For me, while I like the idea of a weather-sealed camera, a large-magnification viewfinder is more important. I'll probably end-up getting a GH2 or, if I'm patient, whatever Panasonic releases next.
For some people this is irrelevant (people's preferences do differ a lot: it's a great thing that there are so many different models from different manufacturers...) For me, while I like the idea of a weather-sealed camera, a large-magnification viewfinder is more important. I'll probably end-up getting a GH2 or, if I'm patient, whatever Panasonic releases next.
digitalDork
Forum Enthusiast
EVFs as we all know, show the image using pixels. If you increase the magnification without increasing the resolution, all you are doing is magnifying the pixels and making this (to my mind at least) undesirable 'pixelated' look of the image even more noticeable.
Given the current resolution I'd rather have a smooth clear E-1 size viewfinder image, and wait until a future microOLED 5mp EVF is implemented to get a similarly smooth image at a larger size.
As an aside, I personally have found it easier to compose images on my smaller OVFs such as the E-1 and D90, than full frame viewfinders, which I find too big to properly comprehend the picture (kind of like holding a double page magazine shot 6 inches from my face) But that might just be me!
--
Cheers, dD
Given the current resolution I'd rather have a smooth clear E-1 size viewfinder image, and wait until a future microOLED 5mp EVF is implemented to get a similarly smooth image at a larger size.
As an aside, I personally have found it easier to compose images on my smaller OVFs such as the E-1 and D90, than full frame viewfinders, which I find too big to properly comprehend the picture (kind of like holding a double page magazine shot 6 inches from my face) But that might just be me!
--
Cheers, dD
Do you have experience with both? Can you explain a bit why you find the VF2 better than GH2's viewfinder?
My experience is mostly from optical viewfinders, and I find that once it starts dropping below 0.7x the tunnel effect kicks-in and the whole experience becomes much less pleasant for me -- and I end up with fewer and worse photos.
My experience is mostly from optical viewfinders, and I find that once it starts dropping below 0.7x the tunnel effect kicks-in and the whole experience becomes much less pleasant for me -- and I end up with fewer and worse photos.
kenw
Veteran Member
That's not including the crop factor. Viewfinder magnification specifications are a bit confusing.
Based on the specs on 43rumors (the same as Steve's) this is a 0.92-1.15x viewfinder (depending on the display mode) - exactly the same as the VF-2. Compared to a full frame that is 0.46-0.57. Not very impressive.
--
Ken W
See plan in profile for equipment list
Here's what it says (replacing # for the asterisks to avoid auto-formatting):
Eye point / Diopter adjustment range Approx. 100% / Approx. 0.92x#1 – 1.15x#2 (-1m-1, 50mm lens, Infinity) #1 : at Finder Style 1, 2 (aspect 4:3) #2 : at Finder Style 3 (aspect 4:3)
Which means:
0.92x at finder style 1 (with info on the side of the image)
1.15x at finder style 2 (with info overlaid on the image)
So in 35mm-equivalent terms that's 0.46x and 0.58x for each style.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum