Originally posted by Trees Are EVF's capable of resolving the full resolution of the image I'm about to take?
Genuine question, I've never used one.
I want whatever is the clearest view of my potential shot. Will an EVF show me all fringing in advance?
Like a lot of the rational discussion, it seems to be "What's your preference?"
Even though I now use both, I still prefer an OVF over an EVF for my type of work -- stills and landscapes. The advantage for me is very subtle, as the better tonality and perceived dimension often helps me in composition. In comparison, I feel an EVF tends to render slightly more contrast and a flatter dimension. With an OVF, I tend to feel the mood of the scene better, and when the the mirror pops up and the view goes dark, the image is not only recorded on the sensor, but also in my mind's eye -- like an instant visual to neural conversion.
That memory helps me in post to recreate that moment, regardless of weather what I remember was exactly what the sensor "accurately saw" and precisely recorded, which is what an EVF shows you. As you may guess, I usually end up doing a lot of post processing to reproduce that "memory." Regardless, the jpeg equivalent image on an EVF can never match what I can achieve via 16-bit RAW processing in ProPhoto. So my memory is usually recoverable.
However, I think Gene, 2351HD, and others have made several good points in favor for EVF's. One that I acknowledge is that EVF's are often superior in low light or when stopping down. In low light an EVF can "boost the gain" a bit and render amazing detail relative to an OVF. I have found that for indoor family pics, concerts/plays and low-light nature shots EVFs rule.