[JohnBee]

And then, another camera will appear and you'll say, "you should try this one before speaking! I'm expecting a huge improvement!"

Well to be fair, I don't know if it will be me saying it, but I think you're finally getting the picture.
With that said, since the a9 EVF has twice the refresh rate of the a7r II, I'd expect performance improvements.

[Kunzite]

A higher performance is nice, but it does nothing to solve the more serious issues I (and many others) have with those EVFs. It's a nice propaganda tool, though.
Of course, 120fps is not new; and it cannot be maintained in lower light.

The 20fps "continuous" EVF display is rather a sensor improvement (higher read-out rates).

[JohnBee]

A higher performance is nice, but it does nothing to solve the more serious issues I (and many others) have with those EVFs. It's a nice propaganda tool, though.
Of course, 120fps is not new; and it cannot be maintained in lower light.

The 20fps "continuous" EVF display is rather a sensor improvement (higher read-out rates).

From what I can see there are four technological improvements with the a9 EVF over its predecessors;

1. Faster sensor readout
2. Improved refresh rate
3. Improved overall brightness
4. Higher resolution

[Kunzite]

1. It's the sensor + processing. This is the easiest improvement, from an EVF point of view - since its done with the current display technology. All that's needed is to make the data available.
2. Can it do more than 120Hz? If not, it's nothing new.
3. OK, it might help outdoors a bit.
4. it's an incremental improvement over its Sony predecessors; the resolution is about the same as the Fuji GFX.

2, 3 and 4 is just trying to close the gap with optical viewfinders.
At this rate, I wonder if they'll ever reach OVF levels.

---

Last edited by Kunzite; 05-27-2017 at 03:06 AM.

[Rondec]

If the only EVFs that measure up are in 2000 dollars plus cameras, then that is a problem.

[biz-engineer]

If the only EVFs that measure up are in 2000 dollars plus cameras, then that is a problem.

The bottleneck isn't the back lcd of the EVF itself, as Kunzite coined, the faster refresh rate for the EVF requires fast image sensor readout, and currently for FF sensors, there is no cheap high resolution AND high frame rate FF sensor. And the resolution and DR of the EVF back LCD is constrained buy the size of it, which mean the DR and resolution of the EVF back LCD is way lower than what the eye can see on LCD display monitor, and of course EVF resolution is way lower than OVF. EVF = saving space for mirrorless camera bodies, that's it.

[camyum]

I would still love to see a hybrid viewfinder.

Attached Images

 

[Kunzite]

What kind of hybrid viewfinder?

For example, the one used by Fujifilm has parallax error, just like any non-single lens viewfinder; and it can't support an interchangeable lens system.

[lytrytyr]

the one used by Fujifilm has parallax error, just like any non-single lens viewfinder

Apparently you're not familiar with the moving brightlines in advanced rangefinder cameras,
or the moving masks in advanced TLRs.

[Kunzite]

Apparently you're not familiar with the moving brightlines in advanced rangefinder cameras,
or the moving masks in advanced TLRs.

Apparently I know about those, but they're only correcting the subject framing - they can't fix the parallax errors.

[lytrytyr]

Apparently I know about those, but they're only correcting the subject framing - they can't fix the parallax errors.

Are you familiar enough to show me a photograph you have taken with one of those systems
where your so-called "parallax error" was a problem?

I used a Leica M2 for thirty years, and never found parallax to be an issue.

[beholder3]

Are you familiar enough to show me a photograph you have taken with one of those systems
where your so-called "parallax error" was a problem?

Let's first see the images from the miniature-display-thingie fanboys where an real optical viewfinder would have been a problem.

[Kunzite]

lytrytyr, I assume that not being able to use long lenses also wasn't an issue. What is the longest, 135mm?
And... 'so-called "parallax error"'? Do you even realize you're arguing against optics?

[camyum]

What kind of hybrid viewfinder?

For example, the one used by Fujifilm has parallax error, just like any non-single lens viewfinder; and it can't support an interchangeable lens system.

You maybe partly right and the fuji attempt is buggy. but no one can say PENTAX could not do it better.


Why should a hybrid viewfinder on a DSLR with extended Live-View-Functions be implemented in the same way as on a mirrorless camera?
Despite the fact that i highly doubt any serious engineer would even think about implementing it the same way...

Again: Why should RICOH-Imaging/PENTAX permute the idea in the same wrong way as fuji did?

[Kunzite]

camyum, FTR I didn't call Fujifilm's attempt "buggy" nor "wrong"; I actually restrained from any such kind of subjective qualifications. What I did was merely pointing out 2 disadvantages of a certain type of hybrid viewfinder (one that is implemented in real products).
And if you think about the cameras that has it, it makes sense: it's a fixed lens camera, and as for the parallax error that's only for the optical path.

Pentax would surely implement a different type of a hybrid viewfinder; it's safe to assume it would be a single lens viewfinder, so no parallax error - and full support for interchangeable lenses.
But at this point, we don't have anything to discuss on.