Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-20-2011, 03:56 PM   #151
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,004
QuoteOriginally posted by Pl Jensen Quote
By flipping up the mirror. Most DSLR are EVIL's. They just happen to have a optical viefinder in addition to the electronic one.
But aren't you then looking at the back of the camera instead of through a viewfinder, with all of the related issues (reduced stability, visibility in bright light, etc...)?

Oh, and some more to add to the list:

12. Place green boxes around every face that is in the frame and in focus
13. Shoot in 4:3, 3:2, 5:4, 1:1, 16:9, etc...

12-20-2011, 05:08 PM   #152
Pentaxian
Pl Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by Emacs Quote
Well, this sounds not quite stupid. But this will cost you additional money: transparent OLED screen + lots of glass.
Again, my NEX-5N + leica super elmar 18 weights slightly more than 500g. The optically inferior combo of K-5 and CZ Distagon 18 ZK will weight more than 1300g and will take much more space. Of course, the leica itself costs more than K-5 and CZ, but you can buy CZ Distagon 18 ZM instead, it's only 40g heavier than leica and just like as good (better than SLR one).
I have no problems that some people don't want an SLR but an EVIL instead. People have preferred all kinds of cameras at all times. However, the idea that the EVIL's are a replacement for the SLR is a false one. Digital opens up for a further fragmentation of the marked. The SLR will be the main choice of the enthusiast in the foreseeable future just like it was in the film days. That did not prevent some to prefer a Leica range finder.....
12-20-2011, 05:09 PM   #153
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,166
QuoteOriginally posted by Emacs Quote
Well, this sounds not quite stupid. But this will cost you additional money: transparent OLED screen + lots of glass.
Again, my NEX-5N + leica super elmar 18 weights slightly more than 500g. The optically inferior combo of K-5 and CZ Distagon 18 ZK will weight more than 1300g and will take much more space. Of course, the leica itself costs more than K-5 and CZ, but you can buy CZ Distagon 18 ZM instead, it's only 40g heavier than leica and just like as good (better than SLR one).
All this is true but the nex5 has some of the worst ergonomics I've tried, hell it makes me long for a canon and I can't stand their ergonomics
12-20-2011, 05:14 PM   #154
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,414
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
All this is true but the nex5 has some of the worst ergonomics I've tried, hell it makes me long for a canon and I can't stand their ergonomics
I really don't like the NEX-5. It is just awful to handle and use.

If Pentax can give a FF the size of a K-7 I would be really happy. Small has it place, but it has its limits as well.

12-20-2011, 05:15 PM   #155
Veteran Member
RuiC's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Lisboa - The Grocery
Posts: 610
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
While i agree it's not necessary to get rid of the mirror box on MF, All cameras suffer from mirror slap to some degree MF to a larger degree. Live view might be nice in studio or tripod bound on location, but there is a hole in the MF market a mirrorless could fill. There have always been MF rangefinders (bronica,Mamiya,Fuji for example) a Mirrorless with a good EVF could fill that gap coupled with a leaf shutter lens it would be very quite as well. Plus side is it could also be less expensive and with a smaller register distance could likely be adapted to any MF lens ever made. I think there are a lot of guys out there that might be tempted into this idea.
Compact (for the format), WR, MF what would be not to like
No camera will suffer from mirror slap IF this one is locked up! As far as LV is concerned I understand that when you press the release button in LV mode, the camera goes to the usual process - from LV - press button - mirror down - focus - mirror up - shutter release - mirror down - mirror up - back to LV . I see no advantage here, unless, yes, unless your camera has the latest patent from Pentax implemented on a new coming body, where when in LV the shutter is fired directly without the messy mirror up/down operation. Here I believe is a great advancement!
12-20-2011, 05:17 PM   #156
Veteran Member
RuiC's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Lisboa - The Grocery
Posts: 610
QuoteOriginally posted by Pl Jensen Quote
I have no problems that some people don't want an SLR but an EVIL instead. People have preferred all kinds of cameras at all times. However, the idea that the EVIL's are a replacement for the SLR is a false one. Digital opens up for a further fragmentation of the marked. The SLR will be the main choice of the enthusiast in the foreseeable future just like it was in the film days. That did not prevent some to prefer a Leica range finder.....

+1 here
12-20-2011, 11:14 PM   #157
Loyal Site Supporter
drougge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Malm
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 787
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
But aren't you then looking at the back of the camera instead of through a viewfinder, with all of the related issues (reduced stability, visibility in bright light, etc...)?
On current DSRLs, yes, but there's no reason (except cost) not to put an EVF in the OVF. You can have every advantage of mirrorless except shorter registration distance and lower price. You could also have a semitransparent mirror (to the normal sensor, not a special AF sensor) and still get many of the advantages while using the OVF for the image itself.

And since I would be perfectly happy to buy such a camera, but I am completely unwilling to buy one with only EVF, the extra cost may be worth it. (Depending on how many feel as I do.)
12-21-2011, 01:23 AM   #158
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,509
QuoteOriginally posted by Pl Jensen Quote
Then we might get pure electronic finders (as opposed to screens on the back of the camera).
I get the feeling that you're not aware that some of the newer mirrorless cameras already have good electronic finders. The best example is the NEX-7, since it combines one of the best electronic viewfinders available with the form-factor of the finder-less EVIL cameras. You might argue (and you're probably right) that the NEX-7 finder still is a huge compromise compared to a good OVF, but just wait a few years - and "few" is not 20 (closer to 5).

12-21-2011, 02:06 AM   #159
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
You might argue (and you're probably right) that the NEX-7 finder still is a huge compromise compared to a good OVF, but just wait a few years - and "few" is not 20 (closer to 5).
It's not worse than APS-C OVF at least now
It may be worse in some aspects, but for some it's much better.
12-21-2011, 06:27 AM   #160
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,004
QuoteOriginally posted by drougge Quote
On current DSRLs, yes, but there's no reason (except cost) not to put an EVF in the OVF. You can have every advantage of mirrorless except shorter registration distance and lower price. You could also have a semitransparent mirror (to the normal sensor, not a special AF sensor) and still get many of the advantages while using the OVF for the image itself.

And since I would be perfectly happy to buy such a camera, but I am completely unwilling to buy one with only EVF, the extra cost may be worth it. (Depending on how many feel as I do.)
But isn't there light loss with the semi-transparent mirror? And more light loss with the EVF overlay? Doest all of this make the optical viewfinder a little less...optical?

This resistance to seeing the world through an LCD perplexes me. Aren't we, after all, using digital cameras and more often than not these days viewing images on digital devices?
12-21-2011, 06:37 AM   #161
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,423
johnmflores, would you give up on seeing the world directly with your own eyes - but instead, permanently wear a helmet which continuously streams live view data to an integrated 3D EVF? (let's ignore the discomfort)
The idea that one should easily give up seeing with his own eyes the world around us and be happy with an electronic interpretation perplexes me. How would you know how the world is like, if you never saw it?
12-21-2011, 06:42 AM   #162
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,166
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
This resistance to seeing the world through an LCD perplexes me. Aren't we, after all, using digital cameras and more often than not these days viewing images on digital devices?
Actually i fully undertand it, I don't even prefer a pentaprism setup, though it works well enough. I much prefer a good rangefinder in many ways, i never lose site of the scene and there is no lag like an EVF. Rangefinders have other limitations though (wouldn't want to attempt Macro with one) but for the way i shoot which a 35mm rf with a 28/50/90 is a perfect setup. unfortunately the digital version of this is well beyond my means (at least until I win that $50 million lottery later this week )
12-21-2011, 06:57 AM - 1 Like   #163
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,004
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
johnmflores, would you give up on seeing the world directly with your own eyes - but instead, permanently wear a helmet which continuously streams live view data to an integrated 3D EVF? (let's ignore the discomfort)
The idea that one should easily give up seeing with his own eyes the world around us and be happy with an electronic interpretation perplexes me. How would you know how the world is like, if you never saw it?
When I ride or hike to the top of a mountain, I stand there, breathe in the fresh air, admire the beauty and majesty of nature, and then think to myself, "let me capture some aspect of this place to share with others." only then will I take the camera out and use the tools available to me to make a successful image capture.

Likewise, my most successful candids are when I am immersed in a scene, sometimes engaged with the players, sometimes a fly on the wall. Only after being immersed with all of my senses can I successfully photograph it, sometimes looking through an OVF, sometimes through and EVF, and sometimes when the situation warrants it through a rear LCD and the camera positioned discretely.

Composing with photons versus composing with electrons make not a wit of difference in the output, the photo. After all, you can't look at a photo on the wall and discern if it was taken with an EVF or an OVF, can you? So does it matter?


That's just my $.02 though. I have a friend who tried my GH2 and couldn't come to grips with the EVF. Truth told, I prefer the look of the K-5 OVF, but the GH2's EVF offers so many benefits that I'm not willing to dismiss it outright. It did take a while to get used too, but human beings are highly adaptable, aren't we?
12-21-2011, 07:30 AM   #164
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
That's just my $.02 though. I have a friend who tried my GH2 and couldn't come to grips with the EVF. Truth told, I prefer the look of the K-5 OVF, but the GH2's EVF offers so many benefits that I'm not willing to dismiss it outright. It did take a while to get used too, but human beings are highly adaptable, aren't we?
+1
I prefer the look of OVF, but Sony's EVF brought too many benifits. No way for APS-C DSLR to come back for me. Even LX sized bright OVF (which is impossible now, since PDAF and metering arrays take 30% of light) won't help it for long.
12-21-2011, 07:48 AM   #165
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 55
Im not sure, but couldn't it be that electronic viewfinders drain your eyes a lot more than optical viewfinders. Sitting in front of a computer screen the entire day can be quite exhausting and I would assume that with a tiny viewfinder this could be even worse. Its just an unnatural, imperfect representation of reality and your brain has to deal with it and compensate for shortcomings of the technique.

just a thought.
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!
camera, cameras, frame, full-frame, future, kitazawa, laughter, mirrorless, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, slr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mr. Kitazawa slated to announce Pentax upcoming bodies in Dec 19'th JohnBee Pentax News and Rumors 429 01-02-2012 09:57 AM
Question Translation of PM's... Where to switch it off??? Rense Site Suggestions and Help 3 07-24-2011 06:32 AM
Interview w/ Pentax Head of Marketing - NEEDS TRANSLATION illdefined Pentax News and Rumors 17 09-29-2010 02:13 AM
Translation from PMA Pentax Interview - new DSLR body this year and company strategy Katsura Pentax News and Rumors 66 09-23-2007 04:15 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:46 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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