Reading mode: Light Dark

Teenagers surprising comment on OVF

Go to last post
O

OpticsEngineer

Veteran Member
Messages
8,889
Solutions
29
Reaction score
6,091
Location
Albuquerque, US
My kids can pick through my cameras and use whatever they like. I have a variety of DSLRs and mirrorless. And the mirrorless have the latest 2.3 MP EVFs.

So I was a bit surprised last week when out of the blue I was told the OVFs on the DSLRs are just more fun. They didn't actually know the word OVF of course. It was the cameras that "don't have little TV screens."

I couldn't disagree. I kind of think OVF is fun too. How does every one else feel?
 
Is it so surprising? Kids know a TV screen when they see one.

I have some cameras with EVFs and I can use them and enjoy them, but I always get sick of looking at a little screen after a while. I can't imagine a world where I would be happy without at least one camera with an OVF.
 
Each time I got a mirrorless, I thought the EVF was cute for anywhere between 5mins-1hr before the novelty wore off. The OLED ones they have nowadays are nice, I'd say I was entertained for 30mins-1hr that time.

But I'm just not that fussed with the WYSIWYG, I use raw anyway.

I prefer the immediacy of the OVF which despite the 'flapping mirror' remains more responsive and without viewfinder lag. Yet watch how those not experienced with fast DSLRs trying to dispute it without experience of the sports and event shooting I'm used to. It's not about pressing the shutter and reeling off long bursts. I need cameras that are watching in real time, not a delay, and don't get further delayed by overburdened electronics trying to relay 50-100 frames a second through the viewfinder and track with weedy AF. It's a bit too much for the electronics at the moment. Lag will come down, it's just not coming down fast enough so far this century for me.
 
Last edited:
Someday, perhaps, they will figure out how to make the mirror slivering disappear electronically, and we’ll have optical viewfinders again. For sure, a hybrid viewfinder could be very nice if implemented well.
 
It's more gratifying; the optics, the weight, the "clunk" of the shutter..
 
OpticsEngineer said:
My kids can pick through my cameras and use whatever they like. I have a variety of DSLRs and mirrorless. And the mirrorless have the latest 2.3 MP EVFs.

So I was a bit surprised last week when out of the blue I was told the OVFs on the DSLRs are just more fun. They didn't actually know the word OVF of course. It was the cameras that "don't have little TV screens."

I couldn't disagree. I kind of think OVF is fun too. How does every one else feel?
Click to expand...
Personally I don't mind EVF or OVF, or even no VF for that matter, like on my Pentax Q.

I choose to shoot OVF when shooting sports though.

But the funniest comment from a kid in our gang of friends was when I took a picture of him with my Nikon 35mm f/1.8 lens with the aperture at f/1.8.

I got that nice soft background that made him really stand out.

I showed him the picture on the back of the camera, and he said . . . "Nice. What filter is that?"

At first I was thinking . . . filter? Well . . . I have a UV filter on the front to keep the dust off the lens (we were camping), but then it dawned on me . . . he was talking Instagram filters or something like that. LOL.

Then I told him . . . "This is no filter. The shallow depth of field was from using a fast lens. This is real. This is what those filters are trying to emulate!" LOL.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)
 
I think the only VF style I find fun to use is that of the rangefinder (or similar styles, such as the X100).

DSLR OVF or mirrorless is of little difference to me. Both are just as easy for action, just as engaging (or not as the case my be).
 
If the question is whether OVF is more fun than EVF I have no answer. When it comes to taking pictures I go for EVF only:
  • It's wysiwyg.
  • Mirrorless cameras are more compact and lighter.
  • It's silent. I find DSLR shutter noise extremely obnoxious.
Nick
 
TacticDesigns said:
OpticsEngineer said:
My kids can pick through my cameras and use whatever they like. I have a variety of DSLRs and mirrorless. And the mirrorless have the latest 2.3 MP EVFs.

So I was a bit surprised last week when out of the blue I was told the OVFs on the DSLRs are just more fun. They didn't actually know the word OVF of course. It was the cameras that "don't have little TV screens."

I couldn't disagree. I kind of think OVF is fun too. How does every one else feel?
Click to expand...
Personally I don't mind EVF or OVF, or even no VF for that matter, like on my Pentax Q.

I choose to shoot OVF when shooting sports though.

But the funniest comment from a kid in our gang of friends was when I took a picture of him with my Nikon 35mm f/1.8 lens with the aperture at f/1.8.

I got that nice soft background that made him really stand out.

I showed him the picture on the back of the camera, and he said . . . "Nice. What filter is that?"

At first I was thinking . . . filter? Well . . . I have a UV filter on the front to keep the dust off the lens (we were camping), but then it dawned on me . . . he was talking Instagram filters or something like that. LOL.

Then I told him . . . "This is no filter. The shallow depth of field was from using a fast lens. This is real. This is what those filters are trying to emulate!" LOL.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)
Click to expand...
 
MikeyBugs95 said:
TacticDesigns said:
OpticsEngineer said:
My kids can pick through my cameras and use whatever they like. I have a variety of DSLRs and mirrorless. And the mirrorless have the latest 2.3 MP EVFs.

So I was a bit surprised last week when out of the blue I was told the OVFs on the DSLRs are just more fun. They didn't actually know the word OVF of course. It was the cameras that "don't have little TV screens."

I couldn't disagree. I kind of think OVF is fun too. How does every one else feel?
Click to expand...
Personally I don't mind EVF or OVF, or even no VF for that matter, like on my Pentax Q.

I choose to shoot OVF when shooting sports though.

But the funniest comment from a kid in our gang of friends was when I took a picture of him with my Nikon 35mm f/1.8 lens with the aperture at f/1.8.

I got that nice soft background that made him really stand out.

I showed him the picture on the back of the camera, and he said . . . "Nice. What filter is that?"

At first I was thinking . . . filter? Well . . . I have a UV filter on the front to keep the dust off the lens (we were camping), but then it dawned on me . . . he was talking Instagram filters or something like that. LOL.

Then I told him . . . "This is no filter. The shallow depth of field was from using a fast lens. This is real. This is what those filters are trying to emulate!" LOL.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)

--
My Personal Flickr Favs . . .
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tacticdesigns/sets/72157631300869284/
[FL][RP][LS][GC]
Click to expand...
What was his response to that though? That's what I'd like to know.
Click to expand...
I had a similar conversation a while back. Same explanation. The response was what's the point if Instagram can do the same thing?

I realized that I didn't have enough common ground with the person to continue the conversation.
 
EVF make me feel seasick.
 
If the kids think that's fun, you should get to try a pinhole body cap. Never entirely sure where the camera is pointed until you see the photos later. :)
 
MikeyBugs95 said:
TacticDesigns said:
OpticsEngineer said:
My kids can pick through my cameras and use whatever they like. I have a variety of DSLRs and mirrorless. And the mirrorless have the latest 2.3 MP EVFs.

So I was a bit surprised last week when out of the blue I was told the OVFs on the DSLRs are just more fun. They didn't actually know the word OVF of course. It was the cameras that "don't have little TV screens."

I couldn't disagree. I kind of think OVF is fun too. How does every one else feel?
Click to expand...
Personally I don't mind EVF or OVF, or even no VF for that matter, like on my Pentax Q.

I choose to shoot OVF when shooting sports though.

But the funniest comment from a kid in our gang of friends was when I took a picture of him with my Nikon 35mm f/1.8 lens with the aperture at f/1.8.

I got that nice soft background that made him really stand out.

I showed him the picture on the back of the camera, and he said . . . "Nice. What filter is that?"

At first I was thinking . . . filter? Well . . . I have a UV filter on the front to keep the dust off the lens (we were camping), but then it dawned on me . . . he was talking Instagram filters or something like that. LOL.

Then I told him . . . "This is no filter. The shallow depth of field was from using a fast lens. This is real. This is what those filters are trying to emulate!" LOL.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Wheatfield7 said:
MikeyBugs95 said:
TacticDesigns said:
OpticsEngineer said:
My kids can pick through my cameras and use whatever they like. I have a variety of DSLRs and mirrorless. And the mirrorless have the latest 2.3 MP EVFs.

So I was a bit surprised last week when out of the blue I was told the OVFs on the DSLRs are just more fun. They didn't actually know the word OVF of course. It was the cameras that "don't have little TV screens."

I couldn't disagree. I kind of think OVF is fun too. How does every one else feel?
Click to expand...
Personally I don't mind EVF or OVF, or even no VF for that matter, like on my Pentax Q.

I choose to shoot OVF when shooting sports though.

But the funniest comment from a kid in our gang of friends was when I took a picture of him with my Nikon 35mm f/1.8 lens with the aperture at f/1.8.

I got that nice soft background that made him really stand out.

I showed him the picture on the back of the camera, and he said . . . "Nice. What filter is that?"

At first I was thinking . . . filter? Well . . . I have a UV filter on the front to keep the dust off the lens (we were camping), but then it dawned on me . . . he was talking Instagram filters or something like that. LOL.

Then I told him . . . "This is no filter. The shallow depth of field was from using a fast lens. This is real. This is what those filters are trying to emulate!" LOL.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
TacticDesigns said:
MikeyBugs95 said:
TacticDesigns said:
OpticsEngineer said:
My kids can pick through my cameras and use whatever they like. I have a variety of DSLRs and mirrorless. And the mirrorless have the latest 2.3 MP EVFs.

So I was a bit surprised last week when out of the blue I was told the OVFs on the DSLRs are just more fun. They didn't actually know the word OVF of course. It was the cameras that "don't have little TV screens."

I couldn't disagree. I kind of think OVF is fun too. How does every one else feel?
Click to expand...
Personally I don't mind EVF or OVF, or even no VF for that matter, like on my Pentax Q.

I choose to shoot OVF when shooting sports though.

But the funniest comment from a kid in our gang of friends was when I took a picture of him with my Nikon 35mm f/1.8 lens with the aperture at f/1.8.

I got that nice soft background that made him really stand out.

I showed him the picture on the back of the camera, and he said . . . "Nice. What filter is that?"

At first I was thinking . . . filter? Well . . . I have a UV filter on the front to keep the dust off the lens (we were camping), but then it dawned on me . . . he was talking Instagram filters or something like that. LOL.

Then I told him . . . "This is no filter. The shallow depth of field was from using a fast lens. This is real. This is what those filters are trying to emulate!" LOL.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Judging by the ogling and hand-pointing, a lot of kids find the antiques hanging in the Smithsonian Air & Space more "fun."

After all, planes with propellers are very uncommon these days, so who can fault them for being drawn to them?

But how long would the novelty last? 5min? 30min? An hour?
 
digitallollygag said:
TacticDesigns said:
MikeyBugs95 said:
TacticDesigns said:
OpticsEngineer said:
My kids can pick through my cameras and use whatever they like. I have a variety of DSLRs and mirrorless. And the mirrorless have the latest 2.3 MP EVFs.

So I was a bit surprised last week when out of the blue I was told the OVFs on the DSLRs are just more fun. They didn't actually know the word OVF of course. It was the cameras that "don't have little TV screens."

I couldn't disagree. I kind of think OVF is fun too. How does every one else feel?
Click to expand...
Personally I don't mind EVF or OVF, or even no VF for that matter, like on my Pentax Q.

I choose to shoot OVF when shooting sports though.

But the funniest comment from a kid in our gang of friends was when I took a picture of him with my Nikon 35mm f/1.8 lens with the aperture at f/1.8.

I got that nice soft background that made him really stand out.

I showed him the picture on the back of the camera, and he said . . . "Nice. What filter is that?"

At first I was thinking . . . filter? Well . . . I have a UV filter on the front to keep the dust off the lens (we were camping), but then it dawned on me . . . he was talking Instagram filters or something like that. LOL.

Then I told him . . . "This is no filter. The shallow depth of field was from using a fast lens. This is real. This is what those filters are trying to emulate!" LOL.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Saint 112 said:
If the question is whether OVF is more fun than EVF I have no answer. When it comes to taking pictures I go for EVF only:
  • It's wysiwyg.
  • Mirrorless cameras are more compact and lighter.
  • It's silent. I find DSLR shutter noise extremely obnoxious.
Nick
Click to expand...
It is indeed extremely obnoxious--and growing more so with time!

With the mainstreaming of mirrorless, it is only a matter of time before the mirror-slap/shutter-crash crowd is issued citations for disturbing the peace--the same way one would regard a typewriter in a library today.
 
Last edited:
A matter of personal preference. Nothing right nor wrong. But IMHO it will totally depending on how we use it, what we want from it, would those we have be good enough?

But I'll not say fun or not, just shall the tool be useful to me.

OVF a few pieces of optics display a portion of the light entering the lens reflected by a mirror allowing shooter to see as what the lens sees. IBasically we are peeking through a small window to watch what is outside the lens. Pros? We can get information nothing more nothing less about the scene. As no other non optical element be involved, no lagging at all.

I shoot with film slr >3 decades and OVF was my only option. Because of my spectacles I even put on a 2x ovf magnifier on MF days. It is a perfect tool for the composition. It was therefore one of my must have item when I went digitalization.

After I tried evf, that mini tv won. Now evf be my must required feature. EVF itself means nothing, might take the risk of evf lag, poor resolution, poor luminance, non responsive etc if we have something not up to the standard. When we have a good enough evf, the way of shooting can be changed in a totally different style. Because EVF (or LCD) is the major medium of Live View.

under Live View shooting, we are not just use the VF to compose the frame, but allows the possibility to control every last detail of our settings because we are actually looking at what the sensor sees. Therefore we can fine tune the setting to set the exposure as we wish down to every elements in the frame. It is something impossible for non live view shooting without realtime monitoring. No more worrying on WB, DOF, focus, saturation etc as we can see in live view.

Live View (evf) actually is where the fun part of photographing. Because we can do our setting, to achieve (create) what we want under the possibility allowed by the real time interaction between the shooter and the live view simulation. Just doing composition through a windows can never supply the fun and experience. Shoot according to the 0ev in-camera metering is no fun about. Keep on trying and reviewing and try again is no fun to me.

The biggest problem of evf is the technology required. High refresh rate, powerful CPU to generate the live view image fast enough, high quality display unit, plus good live view (not every live view up to the standard)... The sort of complaint on evf lag, poor resolution, false color etc can, has been and is improving everyday.

I suppose if under proper guidance evf might be more fun to use I think. Actually it is a full field training on using the 3 parameters and EC. If just P&S, evf nor ovf might have no difference (little use).

By the end, they are just tools and depending on how we use it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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