[osv]

^^ OMG that's funny!

it's hilarious! let's all swap out the factory focusing screen https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/58-troubleshooting-beginner-help/211434-w...cus-k-5-a.html

[bertwert]

At least we don't live in the U.K....

It's pretty bad exchange in Canada right now as well.

[monochrome]

it's hilarious! let's all swap out the factory focusing screen https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/58-troubleshooting-beginner-help/211434-w...cus-k-5-a.html

Actually I meant the Nazi and cheese sandwich thing, but whatever. I have nothing against MILC's per se, nor new technology generally. Smug superiority and arrogant dismissal bother me but we so rarely see that here that it isn't an issue, most of the time.

[Digitalis]

the list of evf benefits over ovf is long, and most people who take the time to learn evf never want to go back to ovf.

The list of OVF advantages over EVF is equally long.

[biz-engineer]

I guess the idea that MILCs were a fad that has run it's course just hasn't crossed anyone's mind. At this point, a lot of us have had a look and said "thanks, but no." That doesn't mean they don't have a place in the world. I know people who never stopped using rangefinder cameras. There's room for every bit of tech. Niche markets etc. But with this quarter, the idea of un-interruted growth eventually killing the DSLR market is dead. It can't happen. The big mistake the MILC people make, is that they think MILC domination is inevitable. It's a fad. If it wanted to be everything for everyone there would have had to be better AF, tracking,a low light viewfinder solution, and it would have have proved to be technically better than DSLRs. With all due respect to the great experiment...it's not like that. If you want the best of anything technically, you don't buy MILC. Most people prefer to see what's there, without it being interpreted by a piece of technology. And that's not going to change. It has more going against it than it does going for it. There was always going to be a limit to the number of people who would accept, the trade offs MILC offers for the lighter weight (or some would say cheap construction). This could be just temporary set back, or it could be a sign the MILC has saturated it's market, and Sony is doomed.

From the photos that I know you are doing: nice macro shots of flowers, landscape around the great national park that surround you , and photos of birds with manual focus A-400mm , you'd better get a full frame mirrorless. The only issue for you is that it's not a Pentax. Other than that, when do you use 8 frames per second and multi-point AFC tracking (a flower can't run away from you)? People say "I buy DSLR because it is the best" sorry, the key point of DSLR is fast AF, the weak point of MILC is AF tracking. Again, a guy who was doing mostly landscape photography once told me "Pentax is not good because they have only 11 point AF and Nikon has 39 points, next time I'm going to buy a Nikon" I asked him "What AF point do you use?" he replied "I only use the center point" ... then I said "Why do you need 39 AF points when you don't use the 11 AF points that you already have on you Pentax ?" ...he stayed silent.

[Chris Mak]

like an ovf has decent resolution? no... the ground glass that's used for focusing destroys the picture quality; replace the screen with something that's usable for manual focusing and you've darkened the ovf and lowered the p.q., because of the increased roughness of the ground glass... been there done that with the k10d, it sucked, and it was never useful for accurate manual focusing.

evf is superior because it has wysiwyg and it has magnification; the only time that there is lag is in dark conditions that render an ovf basically unusable.

when i mount a flash on the a7r, i can see the effect that the flash will have on the shot, in the evf, because the camera takes the additional light into it's evf display calculation... you can't do that with an ovf.

the list of evf benefits over ovf is long, and most people who take the time to learn evf never want to go back to ovf.

that's why the rate of mirrorless growth has been so much higher than that of dslrs.

Well, here is one that has had the A7r for a year now next to the Pentax K3, and as much as I like the advantages of the EVF, I'll be using Dslr cameras with OVF's for a long time to come. In short, for me the EVF is practical, but the OVF is my far preferred choice for looking through when photographing. That is why I prefer an OVF on the Pentax FF. The only real disadvantage about the OVF is that it prevents bodies from becoming smaller and especially lighter, like the Sony A7r.

Chris

[normhead]

From the photos that I know you are doing: nice macro shots of flowers, landscape around the great national park that surround you , and photos of birds with manual focus A-400mm , you'd better get a full frame mirrorless. The only issue for you is that it's not a Pentax. Other than that, when do you use 8 frames per second and multi-point AFC tracking (a flower can't run away from you)? People say "I buy DSLR because it is the best" sorry, the key point of DSLR is fast AF, the weak point of MILC is AF tracking. Again, a guy who was doing mostly landscape photography once told me "Pentax is not good because they have only 11 point AF and Nikon has 39 points, next time I'm going to buy a Nikon" I asked him "What AF point do you use?" he replied "I only use the center point" ... then I said "Why do you need 39 AF points when you don't use the 11 AF points that you already have on you Pentax ?" ...he stayed silent.

That was really mean of you...

39 AF points was just his excuse. But, I do use all 27 on my K-3 and miss it when I go back to 1 on the k-5. The 27 allows me to d o a more precise hyper-focal, by selecting a point to focus on that has a third of the frame infant, and a third 2 thirds behind, and that's rarely the middle of the frame.

[clackers]

I agree with Osv.

You Pentax DSLR users are just .... stupid!

[monochrome]

I want to see the double-blind, random survey of a massive, statistically provable sample, wherein more than 85% of qualified respondents - say 8,500 of 10,000 - expressed their prefererence for EVF over OVF and would never go back, 85% being the generally accepted threshold for the qualification, 'most people who have tried'.

But I'm a stubborn, opinionated old man.

[bertwert]

The only real disadvantage about the OVF is that it prevents bodies from becoming smaller and especially lighter

I agree with you there!
There are some small minor/unimportant cons as well: Worse in low light, no 'instant preview' WYSIWYG, etc.

There are other things that prevent bodies being smaller as well; mainly lens mount flange distance

[pgaikwad]

I agree with Osv.

You Pentax DSLR users are just .... stupid!

OK, just wondering if it isn't it a greater stupidity to try and appear wise on a so-called stupid people's forum .

I fully understand you, however people like you (or me) are not representative of majority of DSLR users where I live. These people don't get that their phone is good enough for their use. Got a baby? Getting married? Travelling? Boom, gotta have a proper photo camera AND a proper video camera. And proper is most of the time, a black brick.

[Fontan]

I am fine either way. I take just as awesome a picture with OVF as EVF. At the end of the day I take better pictures than most with my iPhone. Given enough time of getting used to, equipments make no difference at all to me. Given enough lighting pictures taken by my K10d are just as astounding as any pictures taken by any cameras, any brands. I think OVF users in general are just as smart and stupid as EVF users are users in general. So in the end my conclusion is that we are forever being ripped off by camera manufactures until we stop shooting, and which is by the way fine with me.

[Digitalis]

I want to see the double-blind, random survey of a massive, statistically provable sample, wherein more than 85% of qualified respondents - say 8,500 of 10,000 - expressed their prefererence for EVF over OVF and would never go back, 85% being the generally accepted threshold for the qualification,

That's fair, though I'd prefer to see 90% percentile go EVF.

[cxdoo]

I want to see the double-blind

[mounts the high horse]


The moment you are able to do an actual double-blind, this discussion becomes irrelevant.


[draws the flamethrower]


The thing is, you can't because EVFs suck.


[ducks]

[philbaum]

Hello,

CIPA published their usual production/shipment data for September. Despite claims that DSLRs are being replaced by MILCs, smartphones, kitchen owens and whatever, the DSLR production figures show an increase (while the MILCs declined).
For the entire year, the DSLRs could have a slight decline in units but an increase in value (as shipment figures should follow the production ones). We have 3 months of data which could change things one way or another, though.

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201509_e.pdf

I'd say Ricoh Imaging was right to think the DSLR market will stabilize (that was back when MILCs were "gaining" rapidly). It also means the decision to make the K-mount FF DSLR is not that crazy; it's still simultaneously serving the much larger market and their loyal user base i.e. us. A win-win scenario.

It may be a little early for OVF proponents to declare victory. What you're seeing is the data in column3 which is the data for that single month over the same month a year earlier. If you look at the Production or Shipment information for column 4 (which is the data for Jan - Sept - a 9 month period) one sees the usual relationship of a slight reduction in DSLRs compared with a slight increase in EVF production and shipments.

What will be the relationship numerically between EVFs and OVFs at the end of 2015? What will be the trends - i have no idea. It is an interesting change possibility in an industry thats been in a interative status quo mode for a duopoly for so many years.

But bottom line - the EVF/OVF issue has no real importance to the world at large. Its a curiosity - nothing more.