OVF vs EVF put to rest

Started Sep 16, 2012 | Discussions thread
Piginho Regular Member • Posts: 317
Re: OVF vs EVF put to rest

TrojMacReady wrote:

Piginho wrote:

TrojMacReady wrote:

No OVF with ground glass will be able to show you detail equivalent of each pixel in say the final 24MP image, regardless of how good your eyes are. An EVF can, regardless of its resolution, as long as there's a quick magnification button that allows you to magnify up to pixel level (of the sensor).

And from where have you derived these facts? Please provide links/references!

Here's one simplified explanation and example:


This doesn't answer the question in any way, though it was an interesting read. Also, ground glass screens haven't been used in SLRs or DSLRs for more than 30 years. Viewfinder screens are plastic and some are fresnel type. Minolta were at the forefront of this technology and most recently in Sony implementation used spherical acute matte screens. The closest that I could get to any kind of information regarding resolving power is in the following link.


It has to be born in mind that this link is talking about ground glass, but a simple calculation would indicate at least 9Mp resolution should be possible. How this relates to the more modern screens in a Sony A900 for example, I cannot say, as the information seems to be unavailable. What makes me laugh is your assertion that "No OVF with ground glass will be able to show you the detail equivalent of each pixel in say the final 24MP image," when you have no definitive evidence to back this claim.

As it happens, you may be right, but that's yet to be determined. What is almost certainly true, based on the research that I've done so far, is that the OVF in an A900 or similar will have at least around 4 X the resolving power of a 2.4Mp EVF.

Also, by posting your link and some of your latest comments, you are attempting to move the goalposts of the debate. You're trying to make it about DOF and how it's seen in the viewfinder. What's the title of this thread?

OVF fans have been talking about a variety of things, including DR, lag in the display, resolution and so on. My question to you was about the source of your knowledge about resolution on GG screens, not DOF issues.

Maybe by doing so you can show us just how many pixels can be resolved, specifically on an A900 screen, not forgetting that there are 3 to choose from.

Try a 50mm lens on your A900 with your type M matte. Now try any recent Sony DSLR/SLT/NEX camera with a main sensor LV implementation that allows magnifying to pixel level next to it with the same lens, focusing on the same distant subject. See the huge difference in detail. Seeing is believing, no amount of theorizing or talk from anyone can make a better case than seeing it yourself.

Again, you don't answer the question, because you don't know the answer, so instead you offer an anecdotal response. FWIW, I have had a Minolta 50mm f1.4 for some time now and used it on my A550 (which I believe has a good LV implementation, including a manual focus LV mode) and of course I have used it on my A900.

If you have time to work in this way, then I would agree that magnifying to near pixel level can be useful as a focus aid. But then this discussion was not about LV in any case, it's about EVF and OVF. BTW, I hardly ever used either LV mode on my A550, preferring to use the OVF, even though the A550 OVF is really crappy! Oh, and I have tried EVF and don't like it, even though I accept that it has a lot of benefits.

Sure as hell gonna be more than a measly 2.4Mp.

Did you not get the magnifying part?

If you are taking pictures under time pressure, say for example a wedding (I've done several as the official photographer) and the weather is poor or changeable and the subjects are restless, you do need to work quickly. In this circumstance, I don't want to have to waste time accessing a magnified image, especially as people move all the time anyway. I just want to focus (auto or manual depending on need), shoot, recompose, focus, shoot and so on. No time for image magnification. In this situation, for me OVFs better natural unmagnified resolution easily beats EVFs limited, unmagnified resolution, making focus checking and all sorts of compositional checks easier. Are the subjects blinking, smiling, frowning etc.

If you're not working under time pressure, what's wrong with intelligent preview on the A900? White balance, exposure, DOF, histogram and all manner of things can be checked this way. Yes, I know, you can't magnify the image, but so what, if you've got plenty of time, use intelligent preview, make adjustments as required and shoot. Then check the resulting image in magnified view. The image produced is virtually free, so what does it matter.

You talk the talk, let's see if you can walk the walk!

I did the walk, I have tested both. From your previous post, it's pretty clear that your experience with Sony's recent LV implementations is either severely limited or rather non existent.

Not true, as seen from above, I do have relevant experience of Sony's LV. When I say talk the talk and walk the walk, I'm referring to you making claims, such as your supposed knowledge of GG screen resolving power, thus talking the talk, but failing to back up these claims with any kind of scientific data, this failing to walk the walk.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow