G1X OVF is crappy - or not?

mcslsk · Mar 14, 2012

Many reviewers think that the OVF on the G1X is useless and should have been removed altogether to save cost and size. I respectfully disagree. The OVF on the G1X does just what a view finder is supposed to do: It allows you follow and frame the image. Whenever I want to shoot fast, I turn the LCD off and just let the camera do the work while I concentrate on following the subject. It's click, click, click and 90% hits in terms of exposure and focus. Could the OVF be better or replaced by a EVF? Maybe, but the price (and size) of the G1X would increase.

Marco Nero · Mar 14, 2012

Sure, it's crappy JUST like ALL OVFs are. Treat them like a gun-sight. Use them as a last resort. I never use them at all and I'm still amazed that some people do. Even the advanced Hybrid Heads-Up-Display OVFs on other brands, as good as they are, don't show you what you're about to capture. If you really want to know what your image will look like, even before you press the shutter, just glance at your large, rich, high-rez LCD display.

--
Regards,

Marco Nero.
http://www.pbase.com/nero_design/powershot_pro1

Blunt Instrument · Mar 14, 2012

Like the G12 and it's ancestors, it's handy to have a hole to look through in situations where light washes out the the screen. I don't see what all the fuss is about - why people want to rubbish the thing. It is not claiming to be anything it is not: it's handy in emergencies.

bigdaddave · Mar 14, 2012

What absolute drivel.

You've never used a rangefinder camera with a decent optical viewfinder. A good one is better than a dslr and miles better than an LCD screen.

The ones in the G series are next to useless because they don't give accurate framing or give any indication of focus.

Don't talk about stuff you clearly know nothing about.

Marco Nero said:
Sure, it's crappy JUST like ALL OVFs are. Treat them like a gun-sight. Use them as > a last resort.

j tokarz · Mar 14, 2012

I once bought a camera with only a screen on the back( later panasonic) in the sun, even bright daylight i coudn't see anything at all. I sold it straight away when i got home. I have a canon G1x, and think the vf is 100% improvement.

gustabod · Mar 14, 2012

mmmhh I eventually got rid of my M8 because the famelines were not so accurate, and focusing had never certainty of being spot on (and when shooting wide open focus a bit out is not good enough), so having a big view was nice but not very helpful.

The OVF on the G1X is not in the same class as the view from a rangefinder but is there as an aide when the screen fails. I use it less than 5% of the time, the screen is good enough in most situations (even bright sunlight). It is also worse than the one on the X10 (itself not a particulargy fine example either).

For this type of cameras the finder on the Fuji X100 is the (somewhat) ideal compromise, not sure if Canon could implement, and if they did the price would certainly go up.
--
gustavo

http://www.pbase.com/gustabod

mcslsk · Mar 14, 2012

The OVF covers roughly 2/3 of what is captured by sensor. That is just fine to follow the main object or subject and shoot away if the situation requires. And as I said: Focus and exposure are on spot for majority of images taken that way. For me, the OVF on the G1X is an important feature

Robertomendo · Mar 14, 2012

Thank you very much for this thread! Finally a dose of reality re the G1X viewfinder.

I just ordered a G1X yesterday, it will be my only camera and I must say I wouldn't dream of using a camera with no viewfinder.
Different strokes.

davel33 · Mar 14, 2012

mcslsk I agree with you 100% about the OVF. Was on vacation a few weeks ago and used the OVF most of the time, just the way you talked about. It works very well with the preview set for 2 sec and the display off. Very very happy with the G1X.

Dave

neuron09 · Mar 14, 2012

I don't have a G1x, but do have a G12. I find the OVF useful for some situations and am very glad to have it. Is it an accurate TTL viewer of a dSLR-- no! But working within its limitations (and just knowing that I will need to crop final images a bit), I find it useful for fast shooting, in bright sun, etc. For me, the presence of an OVF on a G camera is a "point for" and not a "point against". That said, I would prefer a good EVF over the current version of the OVF.

wolfpuppies3 · Mar 14, 2012

Thank goodness it is optical and not digital.
--
Photography at the speed of sound.

jim yeats · Mar 14, 2012

I can't imagine buying a camera without a viewfinder.

mcslsk · Mar 14, 2012

No OVF or EVF was a major downside of my NEX3. I thought about the NEX7 but price and the fact that I have a good DSLR kept me from taking that step and then the G1X was announced.

jonrobertp · Mar 14, 2012

You are right, and also for bright sunlight. Without it, I wouldn't be happy with it.

mcslsk said:
Many reviewers think that the OVF on the G1X is useless and should have been removed altogether to save cost and size. I respectfully disagree. The OVF on the G1X does just what a view finder is supposed to do: It allows you follow and frame the image. Whenever I want to shoot fast, I turn the LCD off and just let the camera do the work while I concentrate on following the subject. It's click, click, click and 90% hits in terms of exposure and focus. Could the OVF be better or replaced by a EVF? Maybe, but the price (and size) of the G1X would increase.

Dale Buhanan · Mar 14, 2012

Actually, it's 78%, so it is closer to 3/4 than 2/3 of the frame. That is from the Canon spec on their web-site. Makes a difference.

It is the size that it is to allow for the frame difference due to parallax, and avoid showing something that would not be in the picture as a function of distance.

mcslsk said:
The OVF covers roughly 2/3 of what is captured by sensor. That is just fine to follow the main object or subject and shoot away if the situation requires. And as I said: Focus and exposure are on spot for majority of images taken that way. For me, the OVF on the G1X is an important feature

--
kind regards
Dale

paratom · Mar 14, 2012

I agree. Having the Nex I can say the EVF of the Nex is larger but as soon as the light gets very bright/contrasty/Harsh the EVF is not up to the task.

So for people who only use the vf when the light is too bright for use of the display I would say the OVF of the Canon is the better solution IMO.

VadymA · Mar 14, 2012

Last weekend I was shooting with EVF (FZ150) for the first time. I also shoot a bit with OVF on A620. And I have to disagree that the purpose of the viewfinder is just to frame the image. Modern viewfinders can do way much more. With EVF, I was able to lock the exposure just where I wanted to avoid any blown highlights (the OVF was useless for this purpose pretty mush as the LCD screen under bright sun). With EVF I was able to focus just where I wanted (with OVF it was just a guess). And with EVF I was able to change the settings instantly without crouching over LCD display trying to create some shade. So yes, the OVF is better than no-VFl, like a horse carrieage is better than walking for a long travel. But EVF in modern world is like a car versus a horse carrieage. Some people may still prefer a horse but it is not a standard by any means. All semi-pro cameras must have EFV in my opinion.

mcslsk said:
Many reviewers think that the OVF on the G1X is useless and should have been removed altogether to save cost and size. I respectfully disagree. The OVF on the G1X does just what a view finder is supposed to do: It allows you follow and frame the image. Whenever I want to shoot fast, I turn the LCD off and just let the camera do the work while I concentrate on following the subject. It's click, click, click and 90% hits in terms of exposure and focus. Could the OVF be better or replaced by a EVF? Maybe, but the price (and size) of the G1X would increase.

mcslsk · Mar 14, 2012

I agree that a good OVF or EVF is a good thing to have. But would I be willing to pay more for the G1X if it had? I must admit that ever since AF has been introduced, I hardly ever use manual focus unless I want to set to hyperfocal point. And even on the G1X I know that what ever is in the middle of the OVF will be where the AF sensor locks onto and if I set the metering to spot, that's also where the the light is being measured. Now please don't get me wrong. I am not saying that the G1X OVF is the best I could dream of. It is not. But it serves it purpose when I need it and -as Marco said - for everything else there is the bright and detailed LCD. When I started this thread I really wanted to get some views on what people think about OVF because I was tired of reading in "reviews" that OVF is crap and could as well be missing from the camera. It seems that many agree it should not.

P.S.: I think I would pay more for the G1X if it had a better OVF

VadymA · Mar 14, 2012

I agree, I'd rather have OVF that is on G1X now than no-VF at all. And I would be willing to pay more for G1X with an excellent EVF.

I believe it was pure marketing decision not to put EVF on G1X. Just like a new car model comes out with colored tail lights so that the company has the ability to do minor touch-up a year later by replacing them with clear version in order to stimulate the demad. Overall, the company sells more cars this way. Same with G1X - one year or less from now there will be a version with EVF. Those who wanter it will potentially buy the camera and some of those who bought the current version may upgrade as well (thus more models sold overall). And if the company will decide to ditch G1X due to competition oe whatever reason, they will actually save some money from not spending on EVF in the first place.

paratom · Mar 14, 2012

Looking through an EVF is like watching TV for me.

It disconnects me from the subject. If you have a contrasty scene the EVF isnt up to it, and even if you set the WB right you see muted colors (this is not a calibrated EIZO).
I dont see how I would need an EVF to set the correct exposure.

So compared to a horse I find the EVF is more like a bike with electric motor.

VadymA said:
Last weekend I was shooting with EVF (FZ150) for the first time. I also shoot a bit with OVF on A620. And I have to disagree that the purpose of the viewfinder is just to frame the image. Modern viewfinders can do way much more. With EVF, I was able to lock the exposure just where I wanted to avoid any blown highlights (the OVF was useless for this purpose pretty mush as the LCD screen under bright sun). With EVF I was able to focus just where I wanted (with OVF it was just a guess). And with EVF I was able to change the settings instantly without crouching over LCD display trying to create some shade. So yes, the OVF is better than no-VFl, like a horse carrieage is better than walking for a long travel. But EVF in modern world is like a car versus a horse carrieage. Some people may still prefer a horse but it is not a standard by any means. All semi-pro cameras must have EFV in my opinion.

mcslsk said:

Many reviewers think that the OVF on the G1X is useless and should have been removed altogether to save cost and size. I respectfully disagree. The OVF on the G1X does just what a view finder is supposed to do: It allows you follow and frame the image. Whenever I want to shoot fast, I turn the LCD off and just let the camera do the work while I concentrate on following the subject. It's click, click, click and 90% hits in terms of exposure and focus. Could the OVF be better or replaced by a EVF? Maybe, but the price (and size) of the G1X would increase.

Click to expand...

--

G1X OVF is crappy - or not?

mcslsk

Guest

Veteran Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

mcslsk

Guest

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

mcslsk

Guest

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

mcslsk

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts