Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-11-2013, 10:35 AM   #2431
Veteran Member
Barry Pearson's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Stockport
Posts: 870
QuoteOriginally posted by ytango Quote
I find this example to not be completely analogous to the discussion of OVF vs EVF. Glass cockpits only deal with the data display. Having ONLY EVFs on cameras would be more akin to replacing all optically transparent viewports in aircraft (front windows for passenger planes or canopies for fighters) with monitor displays. There's a reason that every manned aircraft still allows the pilot to see the environment directly.
When using a camera, I can see the environment directly. I just look over the top of the camera!

Perhaps you mean that it is easier to fly and land a plane using a direct view of the environment (no instruments) than it is to take a photo using a direct view of the environment (no viewfinder), if the electronics fail or can't be used for some reason? Or perhaps you mean that it is easier to combine the direct view with the electronic displays in a plane than it is with a camera? I've never flown a plane so I can't compare.

However I have taken photos surreptitiously, not using any viewfinder at all, with varying degrees of success. Needless to say, it works better with static subjects and wide angle lenses than action with long lenses.

We use viewfinders for aiming, framing, and analysis. With landscapes and still life there is typically plenty of time to do these. And sometimes any eye-level viewfinder is very inconvenient, so perhaps an articulated LCD display is best.

With action, (airshows, motor sports, jetski freestyle, etc), I don't have the reaction time and coordination to be subtle. I typically shoot at 7 fps, setting up camera controls as much as possible before the action, (including focal length where possible), then use the viewfinder primarily for aiming. Lag and delay are the main problems. EVFs have display lag. OVFs involving moving mirrors have shooting lag. Apart from that, I could probably get the shot even if it were only shown in silhouette. If I can get the plane in the frame, I hope my camera will do the rest.

QuoteOriginally posted by ytango Quote
Advantages of EVFs are being able to see video as it's shot and magnify live view. The disadvantages are render lag and power draw. The disadvantages can NEVER be eliminated due to physics. Can they be mitigated to acceptable levels via engineering? Maybe. A quick calculation of electron/photon transport speed over copper/optical medium times bandwidth vs the human eye's temporal resolution limits can probably answer that question; I'm too lazy right now. But the main thing is: ALL cameras now already have an EVF (just put a black-felt lined cardboard tube over the LCD). The removal of an optical path is not adding any functionality; it's only taking options away from the user.
I'm used to holding the camera to my eye, not a cardboard tube! An EVF uses a position I have grown used to over the last 50 years. Unless the camera has both an OVF and an EVF, removing the OVF enables an EVF to be put in its place, and reduces cost and probably weight.

08-11-2013, 10:40 AM   #2432
Veteran Member
Barry Pearson's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Stockport
Posts: 870
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
How many backup systems are in place in cockpits? Each implementation of each technology is assessed through associated risk that goes with it. You wearing a watch for the film premiere, taking a snapshot of a cat by looking through the EVF of a camera, and an intercontinental passenger airplane, are three different systems, with totally different risk matrices.
You are right. Aircraft cockpits are mission-critical in a way that watches and camera EVFs are not. The consequences of failure or inconvenience are greater in a cockpit. We have more latitude in watches and EVFs.
08-11-2013, 10:53 AM   #2433
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,813
QuoteOriginally posted by Barry Pearson Quote
When using a camera, I can see the environment directly. I just look over the top of the camera!
I wonder why they made viewfinders, then, if looking over the top of the camera is enough.

QuoteOriginally posted by Barry Pearson Quote
EVFs have display lag. OVFs involving moving mirrors have shooting lag. Apart from that, I could probably get the shot even if it were only shown in silhouette. If I can get the plane in the frame, I hope my camera will do the rest.
EVFs have both display and shutter lag.
08-11-2013, 11:09 AM - 1 Like   #2434
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,529
All I know is my nose still hurts every time I try to look through the viewfinder on my k-01. And everything is all blurry until I hold it away from my eye....................

08-11-2013, 11:55 AM   #2435
Veteran Member
Barry Pearson's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Stockport
Posts: 870
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I wonder why they made viewfinders, then, if looking over the top of the camera is enough.

EVFs have both display and shutter lag.
I wonder why they have instruments in planes, if looking through the windows is enough!

Neither in planes nor in cameras is looking directly at the environment enough. And I never said otherwise! I was showing that the analogy was reasonable.

EVFs don't have to move a mirror out of the way! The numbers for "delay after press" are different.
08-11-2013, 12:18 PM   #2436
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,813
Nobody here is asking for viewfinders with no information display whatsoever. Even the old film cameras had at least the metering needle; now we can see things like the active focus points, exposure, number of frames left and even horizon correction.
What we're talking about is quality reflex OVFs with electronic information and live view available on the back LCD for when you need it. This, vs. electronic everything. Your analogies doesn't support your preferences towards electronic everything.

EVFs have both display and shutter lag, period.
08-11-2013, 01:08 PM   #2437
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,683
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Sony launched its second version of their SmartWatch. It's a multi-function device which, apparently, also shows the time.
By the way, there are smartphone apps which measures pulse rates - you'd just have to put your finger over the camera.
Cool! A smart watch that also tells the time.
There are many reasons why vital sign monitors have not been replaced by smartphones. And it's not just because of the need for telemetry and constant real time measurements.

Smartphones may be smart, but their utility is pragmatically limited. But this is far from the debate on EVF and OVF. Perhaps rehashing the discussion from this thread might help: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/137-photographic-industry-professionals/211471-pros-cons-evf-ovf.html


Ash.
08-11-2013, 01:13 PM   #2438
Veteran Member
Barry Pearson's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Stockport
Posts: 870
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Nobody here is asking for viewfinders with no information display whatsoever. Even the old film cameras had at least the metering needle; now we can see things like the active focus points, exposure, number of frames left and even horizon correction.
What we're talking about is quality reflex OVFs with electronic information and live view available on the back LCD for when you need it. This, vs. electronic everything. Your analogies doesn't support your preferences towards electronic everything.

EVFs have both display and shutter lag, period.
I don't have a preference towards "electronic everything". I am making the point that the inexorable trend is to replace mechanical actions with electronics. This is the trend whatever my preferences. And my analogies are compatible with that trend.

The industry won't be influenced by what I want nor what I say. It is taking its own course. And I think that will result in some top-end professional-grade cameras from Canon and Nikon using EVFs rather than OVFs within 5 years. Perhaps they will take over completely, or perhaps the 2 systems will be produced in parallel. That will presumably depend on demand - we will then find out how many people won't tolerate EVFs and so continue to form a strong market for OVFs.

08-11-2013, 01:36 PM   #2439
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,813
Analogies in which optical devices are not being replaced by electronic ones? Yeah, sure.
08-11-2013, 02:34 PM   #2440
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,512
QuoteOriginally posted by Barry Pearson Quote
You are right. Aircraft cockpits are mission-critical in a way that watches and camera EVFs are not. The consequences of failure or inconvenience are greater in a cockpit. We have more latitude in watches and EVFs.
Plus, the cockpit must work in the night, and readings must be properly illuminated. Hard to do with purely mechanical means, and electronics helps a lot. Similarly, if there is use for cameras in the night, EVFs of some kind would be compulsory, but even then, light other that visible frequencies come in help too (IR, etc.).
08-11-2013, 03:16 PM   #2441
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,728
QuoteOriginally posted by Barry Pearson Quote
I don't have a preference towards "electronic everything". I am making the point that the inexorable trend is to replace mechanical actions with electronics. This is the trend whatever my preferences. And my analogies are compatible with that trend.

The industry won't be influenced by what I want nor what I say. It is taking its own course. And I think that will result in some top-end professional-grade cameras from Canon and Nikon using EVFs rather than OVFs within 5 years. Perhaps they will take over completely, or perhaps the 2 systems will be produced in parallel. That will presumably depend on demand - we will then find out how many people won't tolerate EVFs and so continue to form a strong market for OVFs.
Sure, the trend is there but it hardly means there aren't exceptions. You seem to be on some crusade where if you can find examples of electronics replacing mechanical devices then everything will follow suit. There's no law that says that has to happen as the customers ultimately get the final vote.
08-11-2013, 04:58 PM   #2442
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,234
Ovf devices have been for almost everyone who has procured them a vast improvement over what they had previously. In my experience, a film rangefinder, digital point and shoot with the screen on the back, then a canon bridge with an evf. My first dslr was a vast improvement, mostly from being able to see clearly what I was shooting. Mirrorless cameras are a step back, in rare occasions for me at least, losing the stability a camera held to my eye with both hands. An optical viewfinder on a dslr opened up possibilities. Evf right now would barely match the capabilities of what I'm using right now, in a body that is quite a bit more expensive and requiring a new set of lenses. For what? To not be called a luddite? Get real.

Right now, even with the best evf on the market, with a full frame or denser aps-c body, my shooting experience would be worse than the alternative. They barely match the capabilities of an ovf, and would simply add cost and decrease battery life.

There are shooting styles where an evf would be more than adequate. Probably as time goes on there will be more and more use patterns where it makes sense, maybe even with advantages. But there will be shooting styles and situations where it is at best equal to a dslr.

Oddly one of the compelling reasons to buy a dslr is the possibility to use it for a wide variety of situations. But I suppose only a luddite would have one body and a variety of lenses to cover all the situations, or worse a couple of zooms.
08-11-2013, 11:37 PM   #2443
Veteran Member
Barry Pearson's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Stockport
Posts: 870
QuoteOriginally posted by IchabodCrane Quote
Sure, the trend is there but it hardly means there aren't exceptions. You seem to be on some crusade where if you can find examples of electronics replacing mechanical devices then everything will follow suit. There's no law that says that has to happen as the customers ultimately get the final vote.
I'm not on a crusade - I have no influence on the industry, I'm just expressing my views on this topic and trying to predict what will happen. The industry will follow its own "logic", not mine.

Another analogy is the switch from film to digital camera. There were lots of people who were opposed, (and some still are), but now digital is the norm and film is niche. Those customers didn't get the final vote. I'm not sure who did get the vote. Were there enough people who wanted digital to out-vote the others, or was this largely industry-driven without waiting for a clear majority?

I was personally fairly fast to replace my darkroom with a scanner & Photoshop & ink jet printer, but a bit slow to stop using film and switch to a digital camera. I was held back by my investment in Pentax, but then still a year or so late buying a *istD. I think I was a bit late realising the benefits. I was still entering slides into club competitions years later, which had the side-effect of getting highish scores because most others were no longer entering slides!
08-11-2013, 11:59 PM   #2444
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,813
Oh, yeah; another of those analogies. It doesn't matter that we switched to digital, which shows we're not opposed to technology - when it properly works. It's irrelevant that the digital have clear benefits over film, its immediacy and control, while electronic viewfinders merely tries to emulate the functions of the optical ones.

By the way, how convenient that your preferences reflects an "inexorable trend" This way, you can ignore any argument or opinion we might have.... because we are labeled as irrelevant, and by introducing the 5 years target you can even ignore any market data.
And you made it so that we forgot where we started from... that Moore's empirical observation does not apply to electronic viewfinders (i.e. they're not improving with a measurable rate of double something in 2 years). And it doesn't apply to photography, either, unless again something is doubling in a 2 years period. And it only observes, not causes progress.
08-12-2013, 12:03 AM   #2445
Veteran Member
Barry Pearson's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Stockport
Posts: 870
QuoteOriginally posted by derekkite Quote
Ovf devices have been for almost everyone who has procured them a vast improvement over what they had previously. In my experience, a film rangefinder, digital point and shoot with the screen on the back, then a canon bridge with an evf. My first dslr was a vast improvement, mostly from being able to see clearly what I was shooting. Mirrorless cameras are a step back, in rare occasions for me at least, losing the stability a camera held to my eye with both hands. An optical viewfinder on a dslr opened up possibilities. Evf right now would barely match the capabilities of what I'm using right now, in a body that is quite a bit more expensive and requiring a new set of lenses. For what? To not be called a luddite? Get real.

Right now, even with the best evf on the market, with a full frame or denser aps-c body, my shooting experience would be worse than the alternative. They barely match the capabilities of an ovf, and would simply add cost and decrease battery life.

There are shooting styles where an evf would be more than adequate. Probably as time goes on there will be more and more use patterns where it makes sense, maybe even with advantages. But there will be shooting styles and situations where it is at best equal to a dslr.

Oddly one of the compelling reasons to buy a dslr is the possibility to use it for a wide variety of situations. But I suppose only a luddite would have one body and a variety of lenses to cover all the situations, or worse a couple of zooms.
This was the first SLR I ever handled! (But my father used it, not me).

You don't have to justify your preference for OVFs. That is your business. This isn't a discussion about what photographers should do. It is a discussion about industry trends, advantages and disadvantages of certain technologies, and the likelihood of seeing a MILC with EVF from Pentax in the future. (At least, that is what I am discussing).

It would be a mistake for Pentax to be premature and release a top-end EVF camera to replace an earlier top-end OVF camera before EVFs are able to address that market. And it would be a more serious mistake if such a camera were incompatible with existing lenses - I would hope such a camera would be a member of the K-mount family.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
aps-c, body, k-5, k-7, k-7/k-5, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, reason, sensor, sony
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Speculation: What if Pentax did not go FF but rather a 1.3x? brecklundin Pentax DSLR Discussion 36 08-13-2013 10:36 PM
Any speculation on how long... Tom S. Pentax K-5 10 12-16-2010 09:19 PM
K-x price speculation SylBer Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 10-13-2010 12:29 PM
Small rant + speculation ilya80 Pentax News and Rumors 35 04-20-2010 11:42 PM
speculation about FA lenses on FF DSLR lpfonseca Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 11-05-2009 10:34 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:12 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top