Review K3 mark lll?

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
SrMi
SrMi Senior Member • Posts: 2,406
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
3

John_A_G wrote:

doceyes wrote:

John_A_G wrote:.

so, if the reviewer is well versed with an optical viewfinder and still doesn't see that as a big benefit over EVF, is that person a legit reviewer?

I think it's perfectly valid to suggest the reviewer has to have a history of competence with the products they're reviewing. It's why when I was making money shooting sports about a decade ago I didn't care at all what DPR said about the cameras - they didn't have professional sports photographers/PJs reviewing them. I values the opinions of the working pros more.

But, the part about the viewfinder baffles me here. I was pretty sure most of the DPR review staff had extensive experience with DSLRs. Maybe I'm mistaken and they now employ people whose sole experience is with mirrorless.

I purchased a Sony Rx100 about 2-3 years ago, one of the newest ones in the series. Read the reviews on several sites and all were excellent. Took it on one trip and then sold it. Why? The pop up viewfinder was difficult to view through it, difficult to focus my eye clearly, resolution not the best, and I kept struggling trying to compose a photo. Maybe it’s just me and all the reviews were wrong. Or maybe because I am used to the quality of the image through a prism . So maybe a reviewer needs to be experienced in all OVF’s?

I agree a reviewer of a OVF camera should be familiar with OVFs. As I sad though, as far as I know all the DPR reviewers are - so they should appreciate what an OVF brings to the table. I also think that EVF has been one of the things that upgrades every model. I don't have first hand knowledge, but from reading comments and reviews the newer EVFs are much improved over the ones 2 generations ago. Can't personally say if it's true or not. If it is true, the difference between OVF and EVF has shrunk.

Also, the sales figures would indicate that many people are switching to EVF. Sure, there are a handful of people saying they switched back. But, the data suggests OVF isn't a driving factor for the majority. It may be for the minority. But in that case, that minority is going to care less about reviews anyway. They're only going to look at products with an OVF and there aren't many of those. So, not sure why Pentax faithful are so alarmed that reviewers aren't calling out OVF as a compelling criteria.

The EVFs have improved considerably, but in my eyes, there is still a huge difference. I have been EVF cameras for several years. I much prefer the view through an OVF than through an EVF. The difference is especially striking when photographing with EVF and OVF cameras at the same time. But, again, this is my personal opinion.

Ben Lifson's comment when reviewing the early EVFs still sounds true to me: unlovely to look at, alienating; it tends to quench the feeling the subject gives me.

To me, the main benefit of EVF cameras is the reduced size and weight. With Pentax-3 III and the small Limited primes, that weight advantage of mirrorless cameras has been eliminated (except for m43 systems).

I hope that people will continue to be interested in OVF cameras.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Mako2011
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow