[ffking]

Mine too, and surely it must be on the way. Imagine being able to switch between OVF and EVF in the same viewfinder... or, better still, to activate focus peaking outlines and overlay exposure / (RAW) histogram information on an otherwise-optical view, then review your shots digitally in the viewfinder. Yes please

Let me preface this by saying that I'm coming from a position of ignorance re EVF - but I'm struck by a big 'yes and no' as far as this is concerned: I understand that everything will be turnable on and off in this ideal world, but I'm all for keeping viewfinder information to the minimum useful because it interferes with your seeing of the scene. Even now, when taking landscapes, or non-rapidly changing scenes - I tend to compose through the OVF then turn on Live View to check exposure, level horizon etc - because focus peaking, exposure blinkies, histograms etc etc stop me seeing the imperfections in the scene, and can give a false impression of relative brightnesses etc. In fast moving scenes you have to use the viewfinder anyway, so EVF extra information, if switched on, would similarly get in the way of seeing the whole scene - not to mention the fact that the brain (well my brain, at least) couldn't process the information quickly enough to be useful - and if you turn it off - again, it would take a lot of fast mental processing to keep turning it on and off while following the action -you're back to an OVF. So I can't actually see circumstances in which I'd find extra useful - it would either obscure my view in action shots or be unnecessary due to Live View in landscapes.

[BigMackCam]

Let me preface this by saying that I'm coming from a position of ignorance re EVF - but I'm struck by a big 'yes and no' as far as this is concerned: I understand that everything will be turnable on and off in this ideal world, but I'm all for keeping viewfinder information to the minimum useful because it interferes with your seeing of the scene. Even now, when taking landscapes, or non-rapidly changing scenes - I tend to compose through the OVF then turn on Live View to check exposure, level horizon etc - because focus peaking, exposure blinkies, histograms etc etc stop me seeing the imperfections in the scene, and can give a false impression of relative brightnesses etc. In fast moving scenes you have to use the viewfinder anyway, so EVF extra information, if switched on, would similarly get in the way of seeing the whole scene - not to mention the fact that the brain (well my brain, at least) couldn't process the information quickly enough to be useful - and if you turn it off - again, it would take a lot of fast mental processing to keep turning it on and off while following the action -you're back to an OVF. So I can't actually see circumstances in which I'd find extra useful - it would either obscure my view in action shots or be unnecessary due to Live View in landscapes.

All very reasonable and practical considerations

The key for me, though - as you've mentioned - is that all of the information in an EVF (and, therefore, in our theoretical hybrid viewfinder) can be switched on and off.

A lot of the time, I have no information in my A7II's EVF other than basic settings (aperture, shutter speed, ISO). If I'm manually focusing a fast lens at close range, I might magnify the view briefly so I can get absolute accuracy, or so I can see the shape and size of out-of-focus highlights and choose the best aperture accordingly. But then I'm back to an uncluttered view with the same information than I'd see in my K-3's OVF. In lower-light scenarios, I find the EVF ideal because I still have a nice, bright image in the viewfinder to work with. Yes, it can be unrealistically-bright (although your brain becomes accustomed to this, like any feature or quirk), but it shows a very good (if not *exact*) representation of what the sensor will record. If it's too bright in the viewfinder, I'm probably over-exposing I wouldn't have the histogram running in the viewfinder all the time, nor would I depend on it for clipping alerts as it is based on JPEG output, but it's extremely useful when attempting to keep the exposure pushed to the right, where shadow detail recovery will be required. Again, it can be easily enabled and disabled as required, and that's what I do - I cycle through the viewfinder information I want at any given time, but only when I need to see something different.

All of which might suggest I prefer an EVF to an OVF, but that's not the case. There are lots of situations where I prefer a good OVF, but some where I'd choose an EVF in a heartbeat. That's why, for me personally, a well-designed hybrid - where I have the choice of optical, electronic or combined, with no information, a little information, or every-bell-and-whistle information at my finger-tips - would be a dream come true. Then, it's no longer about which viewfinder is better... we'd be able to choose as the situations arise, whilst accounting for personal preferences; which, after all, is a huge factor. There is no better or worse, only personal preference - so if we could tailor that as required, we'd be well sorted... and the OVF / EVF wars might finally die out

[seagas]

It's not about what I love, it's about what helps me make better pictures. Like many of you, I loved OVF for over 25 years but when I found a better alternative, I moved.



well, that's a very old argument for old EVF, you certainly didn't see how amazing A7r2/A9 EVF is, have you? And people don't realize that if scene in EVF clips, likely will clip in final output too - so you get feedback right on time instead getting surprises later. Photographers eye better get used to what the final output would be instead of what it is perceived by OVF. And of course, EVF helps Photographers eye much better with right focus, DoF preview , focus magnification. Regarding lag, agree but it's not even noticeable for general photography, maybe for sports photographer or panning which I am not into. And for a bit of disadvantage, I can't ignore the advantages EVF offers over OVF.

---------- Post added 07-03-17 at 11:45 PM ----------



so? do I have to praise DSLR, just because it's in DSLR forum? Would love to see if you come up with logical arguments to stay on topics then getting personal.

The argument is valid, and true, we humans are analog, not digital. Everything we see and do is analog in nature. As to the the EVF in A9, yes I have seen it and used one, while it is very nice, I do not like it, I PREFER the OVF thank you very much. I could care less if the EVF makes a better picture for me as its use makes me uncomfortable, it does NOT make an enjoyable experience for me. I do photography because I enjoy it, if it stops be enjoyable, what's the point?

[yusuf]

The argument is valid, and true, we humans are analog, not digital. Everything we see and do is analog in nature. As to the the EVF in A9, yes I have seen it and used one, while it is very nice, I do not like it, I PREFER the OVF thank you very much. I could care less if the EVF makes a better picture for me as its use makes me uncomfortable, it does NOT make an enjoyable experience for me. I do photography because I enjoy it, if it stops be enjoyable, what's the point?

well, arguable but what to say isn't it unfair that only one sided talk about praising of OVF and DSLR allowed? In such circumstances, no discussion can take place - you find EVF unpleasant, I find OVF obsolete, difference of opinion but that's what the platform is for. I didn't make any personal remarks, but then my post is reported to mods and deleted which only had comparison (funny that someone finding technical comparison offending). So I am done with this topic.

---

Last edited by yusuf; 07-05-2017 at 06:04 AM.

[D1N0]

isn't it unfair that only one sided talk about praising of OVF and DSLR allowed?

That is not the case, but you can't seem to stop making statements about the death of DSLRs like it is a done fact, without so much as acknowledging the advantages of the OVF and just repeating why you think the EVF is better. It is tiresome and it is not a discussion but a manifold repetition. So I invoke a draw between OVF and EVF. Both can exist.

[Mikesul]

It is long past time for this thread to die.

[yusuf]

... So I invoke a draw between OVF and EVF. Both can exist.

Yep. just like film and digital! let's see where it heads to.

[seagas]

Yep. just like film and digital! let's see where it heads to.

Yet people still shoot film and is making a come back, hmmm. Facts are funny things, they refuse to be ignored. Opinions and feelings are not facts. As long as there is a demand, someone will provide to that demand.

[photoptimist]

Yep. just like film and digital! let's see where it heads to.

Or is it just like smartphones vs. ILCs? Or is it SUVs vs. sedans? Or is it zooms vs. primes? There are many examples of rising "new" products that never dominate the "old" ones because the old technology still offers a distinct advantage.

The bigger trend in trends is that most of them end.

[BigMackCam]

So I invoke a draw between OVF and EVF. Both can exist.

Agreed... And on that happy note, folks, I'm going to close this thread to avoid repeats of the same old arguments. The subject has been more than fully debated, and - after 39 pages of posts - the conclusion is probably what most of us expected right back at the start

If anyone has anything new and specific to discuss, please feel free to start a new thread.

Thanks!