[Kunzite]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

We could debate this forever, without reaching a consensus. Technology A works better for you, technology B works better for me - we should be happy that both are available.

In particular, I disagree with the assessment that EVFs have an advantage because they offer an uncalibrated, low resolution, low DR, different shutter speed approximation of a JPEG captured with some current settings. I'm not doing post processing when looking through the viewfinder, and the camera is not that inaccurate to require full-time fine adjustments.

[JeffB]

OVFs are dim ...

True - in dim light.

OVF are bright when you are looking at bright light. The opposite is true of EVF. My main issue with EVF is still their dimness compared to ambient light in what some may call extreme situations: high altitude sun and snow. But I call that home. Until EVF brightness can auto adjust up to a point where it is much closer to midday sun there is still going to be an advantage to OVF.

[clackers]

In particular, I disagree with the assessment that EVFs have an advantage because they offer an uncalibrated, low resolution, low DR, different shutter speed approximation of a JPEG captured with some current settings. I'm not doing post processing when looking through the viewfinder, and the camera is not that inaccurate to require full-time fine adjustments.

This.

I own a pretty good EVF on a NEX-7 but I never pretend it's a good representation of what will appear in Lightroom. I just use it for framing like everyone else.

Nor do I trust its focus peaking for MF over my K-30's split prism screen with manual lenses.

[kadajawi]

We could debate this forever, without reaching a consensus. Technology A works better for you, technology B works better for me - we should be happy that both are available.

In particular, I disagree with the assessment that EVFs have an advantage because they offer an uncalibrated, low resolution, low DR, different shutter speed approximation of a JPEG captured with some current settings. I'm not doing post processing when looking through the viewfinder, and the camera is not that inaccurate to require full-time fine adjustments.

Maybe it's just my eyes, but the resolution I see in the APS-C OVF isn't very high either. My phone has a higher resolution than my eyes, I need to take off my glasses to get close enough to the screen to see pixels. So I have little doubt that that particular problem will be solved soon enough, and that EVFs will look absolutely sharp to our eyes, without any discernible pixels.

Uncalibrated... you mean the colors. IMHO they are not too important, and at least I get the advantage to be able to see when the sensor clips, for example due to LED lights.

DR... yes, at the moment that's an issue, we only get to see a processed "JPEG" displayed in the EVF. But I expect them to fix that... to install screens that are able to reach a DR similar to that of the sensor, and to utilize a processor that is able to display a video feed with a similar DR to what the sensor delivers. Basically it shows a raw photo, along with a histogram showing what the raw file actually caught/will get.

I've had less problems manually focusing a rather old Sony a57 with a not good EVF than focusing my *istDS with split screen micro prism screen or my K-5 with the stock screen. Perhaps it's only my eyes...

[reh321]

Good idea. What kind of clone? One with a frame that must be sticked on the camera or one that comes with an elastic cord?

Can you give a link to your chosen model?

This is the one I bought:
V6 2 8x Viewfinder 3" LCD Magnifier Extender for Canon EOS M Mirrorless Camera | eBay
It has a metal frame that attaches to the camera via the tripod mount.
Unfortunately, this one was designed for a Canon EOS-M, so I had to modify the tripod mount to make it fit
(I had to drill a new hole, put spacers between the bottom of the mount and the camera, and then get a longer screw)
I remember someone here saying that there is a variant which fits the Q much better ... but unfortunately I don't remember which variant that was.

[cfraz]

That is simply not true. You're mistaking me for someone else.

I'm not sure how else to interpret what you've said:

Whenever I use an EVF camera, my mind goes to "OK, I'm going to take a picture of this picture of what I want to take a picture of." Ugh.

Rubbish, of course. The sensor is still being exposed with light directly from the lens.

I think that's really all what this discussion is about. And why it always turns into a heated discussion: People heavily invested in K-mount being afraid of it's declining support, and the others only seeing the solution for Pentax without that K-mount. Any inovation that makes a new mount possible is always automatically discreted by the heavily invested userbase. No matter how many advantages that inovation has. If they would only be honest about that, then the discussion would be much more open and productive.

[Zygonyx]

Mirrorless is the design inspired by (1) cutting cost to the bone and (2) pushed by companies who never had or who abandoned traditional mounts because they do not have enough stamina to compete using them.

So, considering (1) and (2), if you think that the future is cutting costs to the bone as the only mean to compete, and the prevail of one solution only, they we as a society are doomed and dead before we start taking about anything. First is a form of legal economic prostitution and a generator of social, economically transferrable diseases. The other some form of communism.

By that logic they won't need even people in such factories. As a whole, we are indeed going towards that form of "economy" anyway. Same as some believe we should stop being humans and opt for genetic engineering, get rid of deficient natural limbs and organs, replace them with artificial substitutes and regulate our natural impulses to become more "economically sustainable".

As they say in westerns, "It ain't whiskey. You drink that pis*, I won't".

Let me add : (3) selling with a consistent mark-up the apparent body compacity (thereto, masking the lens system's physical constraints : e.g. see as a carricature Sony's mirrorless continual beercans production).
Mirrorless = "smoke and mirror" in this respect.

---

Last edited by Zygonyx; 03-07-2015 at 01:17 AM.

[Kunzite]

Maybe it's just my eyes, but the resolution I see in the APS-C OVF isn't very high either. My phone has a higher resolution than my eyes, I need to take off my glasses to get close enough to the screen to see pixels. So I have little doubt that that particular problem will be solved soon enough, and that EVFs will look absolutely sharp to our eyes, without any discernible pixels.

Uncalibrated... you mean the colors. IMHO they are not too important, and at least I get the advantage to be able to see when the sensor clips, for example due to LED lights.

DR... yes, at the moment that's an issue, we only get to see a processed "JPEG" displayed in the EVF. But I expect them to fix that... to install screens that are able to reach a DR similar to that of the sensor, and to utilize a processor that is able to display a video feed with a similar DR to what the sensor delivers. Basically it shows a raw photo, along with a histogram showing what the raw file actually caught/will get.

I've had less problems manually focusing a rather old Sony a57 with a not good EVF than focusing my *istDS with split screen micro prism screen or my K-5 with the stock screen. Perhaps it's only my eyes...

All right, please make sure to tell me when all those issues (and the many others) would be solved!

By the way:
- many of us are preparing to spend $$$$ on the new 35mm Pentax DSLR
- improving the EVFs is not so easy, it's a long, iterative process. In the last years we had some processing power being added, and that's all.
- the colors are important every time someone calls the EVF WYSIWYG, or that it can evaluate WB on it
- won't the EVF image clip before the RAW file?

Don't misunderstand me, even the current high-end EVFs are quite good. But there still are disadvantages - not easy to fix ones - and there are good reasons to prefer a natural, optical viewfinder image.

[kadajawi]

All right, please make sure to tell me when all those issues (and the many others) would be solved!

By the way:
- many of us are preparing to spend $$$$ on the new 35mm Pentax DSLR
- improving the EVFs is not so easy, it's a long, iterative process. In the last years we had some processing power being added, and that's all.
- the colors are important every time someone calls the EVF WYSIWYG, or that it can evaluate WB on it
- won't the EVF image clip before the RAW file?

Don't misunderstand me, even the current high-end EVFs are quite good. But there still are disadvantages - not easy to fix ones - and there are good reasons to prefer a natural, optical viewfinder image.

Ah, but what I am saying is that Pentax should have lenses on the market for the time when (and not if) mirrorless takes over the world. Otherwise it will be like Samsung... "nice camera, but are there any lenses for it? Thanks, I'll stick with Fujitsu/Panasonic/Olympus/...". Samsung is trying to get into the position where they can wait for the storm. Pentax isn't, they are holding on to the past.

Well have to see how many are actually willing to spend $$$$ on the FF. :P

Samsung has done quite some leaps forward, the processor in the NX1 is far ahead of what, say, Fujitsu can offer. And they have even newer, faster processors they can base their next imaging processor on. Some of the fastest there are in the mobile world.

Ok, they may be important to some, to me they aren't. Colors are fixed in post anyway, if necessary. OLED screens are also capable of absolutely stunning colors.

It depends on how good the screen is, but I've seen the OLED screen on my old phone display a huge range of brightness levels, it all depends on if they are able to drive the brightness of each pixel independently. For LCD screens that's not (easily) possible because they usually have one big backlight behind the screen, but since OLEDs are self illuminating... I think what is needed is a way to drive the OLED screen properly, then it can easily display the DR the sensor is capable of displaying (and much more).

Samsung must be working on technology to record, transfer and display videos with high DR, as, well, it's supposed to be the next big thing that sells TVs now that everyone has a HD one, and Hollywood seems to be excited about that prospect too. They may be able to use some of that tech in their cameras. Hopefully the rest of the market catches up soon enough.

[pacu]

If all there is to life is EVFs and f/1.4 prime lenses with the accuracy of contrast autofocus then Fuji is the way to go. I think it is a good approach, but in life there are more than one road to walk. OVFs don't produce heat when you wait and anticipate the moment in wildlife photography.

[kadajawi]

If all there is to life is EVFs and f/1.4 prime lenses with the accuracy of contrast autofocus then Fuji is the way to go. I think it is a good approach, but in life there are more than one road to walk. OVFs don't produce heat when you wait and anticipate the moment in wildlife photography.

That's actually a very good point, and one that EVFs/mirrorless designs can't overcome. Maybe a system that is off until you touch the shutter button, but then springs to live immediately and focuses etc.? You wouldn't be able to look through the lens though. Or OVFs will become a niche thing...

[Kunzite]

kadajawi:
We are spending way too much talking about EVFs and how mirrorless would take over the world on a forum dedicated to a traditional SLR brand, IMO. So far we still have a choice, and I am on a forum dedicated to a brand which reflects my choice; how about you?

What do you mean, "Pentax should have lenses on the market"? For a hypothetical future new mount mirrorless? Who would buy lenses which can't be used?

I'm sure you won't spend money on the FF - after all it's a Pentax, not a Samsung - but I'm also sure it will be a successful product (by meeting and perhaps exceeding sales targets). It's not a short term solution, it's not a quick fix to every problem conceivable - but something they'll be able to build on.

The NX1 is a $1500 APS-C camera. Its speed doesn't come for free, and of course more processing power can be added to a DSLR as well.

I don't like OLED's oversaturated colors. That's cheesy consumer technology with a limited life span.

[derekkite]

People are judging EVFs (and mirrorless) by how they are now, not how they will be. It's akin to looking at the first motorized horse carts and saying... nah, these things will never be good, they should keep making horse carts with real horses in front. The other stuff is just a fad.

The thing with mirrorless now vs later is that it takes a couple of years to build up a good enough general purpose line up of lenses (and to get them reviewed etc.). Everyone but Pentax, Nikon and Canon have a head start. So when the market is shifting, they will be late to the game and people will be buying into those other brands. Really good mirrorless cameras that aren't lagging behind DSLRs at all will still take a year or two, but it's about being ready and having the system to support such a camera.

That is nonsense. Why would anyone in their right mind buy a product that is inferior on the promise that if they spend their money again in a few years they will get what they want?

Arguably one of the best evf's on the market has a fatal flaw. If you follow a moving subject, hit the shutter button on continuous, the evf goes black and updates you with the last shot you took.

Sorry, I pass. Maybe in a few years the functionality will equal what I have now. Then Nikon, Canon and Pentax will start offering it as an improvement.

I'm certain Nikon, Canon and Pentax have an engineer developing an evf system, and every time there is a technological advance it is presented as a potential offering. Then it is compared to the ovf, and it just doesn't quite make it for their premium offerings, and the guy goes back to his office. Once it is ready, we will see it offered.

[clackers]

$1500 is a lot of money to pay for a cropped camera these days. No wonder almost no one has one, and Samsung have released the NX 500.

[Kunzite]

derekkite, they don't even have to develop their own EVFs, Epson (and perhaps others) would do that for them. The EVFs from the Olympus cameras are Epson, by the way.