[surfar]

Then you may be in the wrong thread.

i dont think so, ha ha....perhaps some here took the wrong fork in the road?

[monochrome]

Your mind may think that way but i believe facts not opinion.....Pentax is only a brand name,it can be gone tomorrow at the whim of a Ricoh board meeting.

---------- Post added 05-13-17 at 09:08 AM ----------



Yes, i have read comments from some people who say stuff like that.Fuji has the Xpro1/2s that offer EVF/OVF for those people.

Dude. They're all brands.

Sony's Board can decide to stop throwing money down a rathole tomorrow. Mitsubishi can decide to stop lettin Nikon's Board rationalize losses. Sony can tell Olympus its over. Panasonic can beat feet. Instax can end next year and Fuji has no cash flow for digital cameras. Ricoh can punt any day - they probably should.

So what?

[Kunzite]

Whats wrong with your eyes?....I know you work in front of screens,but of the 4 EVFs in cameras i own,i dont have a problem.They all work.

Except for some astigmatism and myopia, nothing - indeed, I'm working with PCs all day long without an issue.
However, EVFs are tiring me. The record was just a few seconds until I had a very sharp eye/headache (though that was likely due to some interference with artificial lightning). Even if it doesn't happen (quickly), the EVFs are less comfortable to use. For me.

Then, it's the pixelation and lag; oh, yes, I notice them.

---------- Post added 13-05-17 at 01:41 AM ----------

Yes, i have read comments from some people who say stuff like that.Fuji has the Xpro1/2s that offer EVF/OVF for those people.

Guess again.
You're combining a technology which is not desirable (EVF), with one which is not well implemented (OVF).
First, because we're talking about people for which EVFs don't work. Why would they want a hybrid viewfinder?
Second, because the OVF part is a derivative of the direct optical viewfinder. The SLR viewfinder system was designed to solve problems like parallax errors, and (being TTL) to work with every focal length. The X-Pro1/2 being fixed lens cameras is not a coincidence.

[wildman]

I asked god and he said to ignore you because you are a troll

Wrong god. God is a she.

[surfar]

Guess again.

The X-Pro1/2 being fixed lens cameras is not a coincidence

Take your own advice.

---------- Post added 05-13-17 at 10:34 AM ----------

Clearly, my point is, Sony is a consumer electronics company. They sell toys. Pentax is an optics company. They sell lenses and a few bodies on which to mount them. The lenses matter if you want to build a system. The cameras matter if you want to sell a succession of expensive, skinny, shiny, hipster plates that can't do anything without another attachment to make someone else's lenses work with them (at less than their designed functional utility).

Dude. They're all brands.

Sony's Board can decide to stop throwing money down a rathole tomorrow. Mitsubishi can decide to stop lettin Nikon's Board rationalize losses. Sony can tell Olympus its over. Panasonic can beat feet. Instax can end next year and Fuji has no cash flow for digital cameras. Ricoh can punt any day - they probably should.

So what?

DUDE,its wonderful you can grasp all this stuff!

[seagas]

Actually, some people are much more acutely visually sensitive to the slight lag in an EVF. The discrepancy between what they see in the EVF and what their inner ear tells them will make them nauseous (it's actually an adaptive biological response because the body interprets the eye-ear discrepancy as evidence of poisoning and triggers vomiting).

That would be me, at least now I know reason why I feel that way when I use an EFV as apposed to and OFV. I don't seem to have that issue much when using a large screen, just when my eye is up to a FV.

[Kunzite]

Take your own advice.

I am not guessing.
Making a variation of the direct optical viewfinder with interchangeable lenses ranging from 10 to 400mm is not feasible. The X-Pro1/2 had to use a fixed lens, or a purely electronic viewfinder.
Rangefinders have similar limitations; they try to cope to some extent (not 10 to 400mm...) with viewfinder markings and accessory viewfinders. This is something well known from the film days.

[kenspo]

Funny, that most of those bashing Sony, have never even tried the system. Sony is really on to something now..I can test all new Sony stuff if and when I want, and of course I do so..Same with Panasonic, Fuji etc..I like to know what all systems have out there. A9 is as good as they say it is. I love Pentax, and will stay with Pentax..But they need to do the correct steps in the future to stay in the game. Both Nikon and Canon will need to do drastic changes in the future, to avoid drowning.

[ffking]

The sad truth is that DSLRs might well be destined to die a long slow death through lack of investment and innovation which creates a vicious spiral of diminishing demand, like film cameras. But it doesn't have to be the case - as has been noted, there can be room for both. EVF might take over in areas where cameras are faster reacting than human brains and you really need a WYSIWYG solution - but, apart from the comments already posted about the pleasantness or otherwise of EVF ('ve never used one, so I'm not qualified to comment) I still think that for the slower more contemplative forms of photography it's better to do the initial image processing in your brain than leave it entirely to the camera. I do know that I'm probably around the average age on this forum (late 50s) and have spent many decades not finding that OVFs in any way limit my photography, so I might be biased - but it's also the case that in fast shooting experiences the only extra information you'll get from an EVF that you'll have time to take any notice of is the exposure, and one tends to use automated exposure settings anyway.

[TaoMaas]

I think this is a bit of a lame discussion in the digital age. Every bit of news video that has been shot over the last 20-30 years was done through an EVF. Granted, still photography is different than video, in which the camera is always rolling...but one of the great benefits of digital photography that is often touted is that we don't have to pay to process each individual frame, so we can shoot as much as we want. So shoot in bursts! Anticipate the action and shoot 8-10 frames. What's the big deal? I think that defending optical viewfinders is a lot like trying to defend film. eh....it has it's place, but times have changed.

[Kunzite]

Rubbish. EVF bigotry.
There's nothing wrong with wanting to use a viewfinder that doesn't cause me physical discomfort and (in certain conditions) pain. Despite being told every single MILC flagship "this EVF is much improved, you must try it!", it's optical for now.

[seagas]

Rubbish. EVF bigotry.
There's nothing wrong with wanting to use a viewfinder that doesn't cause me physical discomfort and (in certain conditions) pain. Despite being told every single MILC flagship "this EVF is much improved, you must try it!", it's optical for now.

I feel your pain, I'm using a Lumix ZS503 as my travel cam and one of the reasons I use it apposed to other compact digital cams, is it has an EVF. It's a god send in bright light outside but there are times I wish I had one of my old film range finders with me instead

[ffking]

I think this is a bit of a lame discussion in the digital age

Nobody is arguing about digital cameras (well, a few people still like film because it renders stuff differently, and the like that difference, as they're entitled to} - to me it's actually about photography, and how much involvement you want to have in the image making process - SLRs remained the tool of choice for serious photographers when the mass market was for compact cameras because of the control they give over image making - that might be their niche role in the future, but it is an important one, because the big move the A9 makes is towards solid state, and the ultimate logic of that is more and more being done by the camera and less by the photographer. This isn't a bad thing in all circumstances - the consumer market will probably love it, and there is nothing intrinsic in digital that prevents total control, but the logic of digital pulls the other way.

Having said which, DSLRs probably don't need to develop much further, so if development comes to a halt, those of us who like them will still be able to take photographs limited only by our vision and technical mastery.

[TaoMaas]

Nobody is arguing about digital cameras...

And...I didn't say they were. My point is that arguing in favor of optical viewfinders vs EVF is a bit like arguing in favor of slides vs digital images. Those in favor of optical viewfinders say they don't like the lag associated with EVFs. But the solution to that in the digital age is to shoot in bursts. It costs next to nothing, right? I get that this kinda defeats the "capture the moment" feeling, but I feel that's an out-dated concept. And I feel like it's akin to those who miss nailing the exposure because they're shooting slide film. These days, we shoot raw and fix things in post-processing. Likewise, i think we'll all be moving to EVFs and shooting in bursts when we need to capture peak moments. It's simply taking advantage of what the technology allows us to do.

[surfar]

Funny, that most of those bashing Sony, have never even tried the system. Sony is really on to something now..I can test all new Sony stuff if and when I want, and of course I do so..Same with Panasonic, Fuji etc..I like to know what all systems have out there. A9 is as good as they say it is. I love Pentax, and will stay with Pentax..But they need to do the correct steps in the future to stay in the game. Both Nikon and Canon will need to do drastic changes in the future, to avoid drowning.

YES,you've got the same situation as me.

The sceptics can say what they like, while they use a $ony sensor.