Lack of EVF on DSLRs to change?

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Rich, Jan 8, 2006.

  1. Rich

    Rich Guest

    I'm wondering if in the long run, this isn't going to be
    a cheaper alternative in this increasingly competitive
    field? A 500,000 pixel EVF could replace an optical viewfinder.
    Some EVFs are also provided with automatic gain which allows you
    to see an image even when it's somewhat dark, somethiing optical
    viewfinders can't provide. The irony is that the cameras EVFs are
    currently on (P&Ss) have alot of trouble focusing in dimly lit
    situations.
    From what I've heard, the main problem with putting an EVF
    on a DSLR is that they have to power the big sensors constantly in
    order to provide an image.
    It might be possible to make DSLRs much faster by eliminating the
    mirror and prism mechanics entirely. Of course you'd lose the shutter
    and mirror noise, but that's probably a big plus in many situations.
    The only current "SLR like" camara with an EVF is Sony's R1, that I'm
    aware of.
    -Rich
     
    Rich, Jan 8, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Rich

    Stacey Guest


    Not on a camera I'm going to buy. Unless something changes a BUNCH, I have
    no interest in an EVF camera.
     
    Stacey, Jan 8, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Rich

    Jasen Guest

    You really are a fool. The vast majority of people don't buy DSLR's to have
    an EVF. This is the whole point. You stick to your nice EVF style camera
    which loves taking centralised images of worth to nobody but the family
    album.
     
    Jasen, Jan 8, 2006
    #3
  4. Are you retarded? Why go backwards from an optical viewfinder to a
    mini-TV? Maybe if you really owned a camera you'd understand these
    things.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Jan 8, 2006
    #4
  5. Rich

    Gormless Guest

    You foool. You poor misguided idiot.
     
    Gormless, Jan 8, 2006
    #5
  6. Rich

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Why would anyone want to buy an SLR and get stuck with an EVF? Doesn't
    that kind of defeat part of the purpose of the thing? You buy an SLR to
    get away from that kind of crap.
    No, there are other problems, too. Like compromising image quality
    in order to make the sensor able to do it. Like the fact that there
    is no reason to have one when you can have a real optical viewfinder
    instead.
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Jan 8, 2006
    #6
  7. Rich

    bmoag Guest

    Current EVF systems suffer from technical but not insurmountable problems.
    The SLR form factor has been in development since the 1930s, the EVF form
    factor is a child of the digital revolution.
    Properly used an EVF has several advantages over high quality pentaprism
    direct through the lens viewing.
    Cameras like the D70, while allowing direct viewing through the lens,
    actually have quite lousy mirror prism systems with dim images and nearly
    useless focus screens.
    Properly used an EVF allows realtime viewing of what the effect will be of
    exposure variations/bracketing, something impossible with an SLR, unless you
    have the lemur-like ability to actually see something on the focusing screen
    when the diaphragm preview button is pressed at f16.
    There is no mirror slap/vibration with an EVF camera.
    EVFs can be difficult to use in direct sunlight. But who can actually judge
    the quality of an image after it has been taken on the teeny LCD screens on
    current SLRs, particularly in direct sunlight? How many pictures appear in
    focus on those screens only to prove less than focused when opened in one's
    computer?
    The future dSLR can incorporate both EVF and direct through the lens viewing
    through the same viewfinder. The technology is actually quite ancient to
    allow for superimposition of the EVF, which could be acquired via an imaging
    sensor built into the mirror-it does not need to have the resolution of the
    camera imaging sensor. No kidding: this technology has been available in
    operating microscopes for almost twenty years. If the market wants this
    feature it will happen.
     
    bmoag, Jan 9, 2006
    #7
  8. Rich

    Larry Lynch Guest

    Nor on anything I'de purchase either.

    I've been "playing" with good EVF cameras for years.., they cant hold a
    candle to an optical VF.

    Larry Lynch
    Mystic CT
     
    Larry Lynch, Jan 9, 2006
    #8
  9. As this is from Rich who only owns a cast iron 126 Russian 126 Lomo....
     
    Darrell Larose, Jan 9, 2006
    #9
  10. Get a nice point-and-shoot with a swivel screen then you can do
    self-portraits of your head up your arse.
     
    Darrell Larose, Jan 9, 2006
    #10
  11. Rich

    Ray Fischer Guest

    And several serious disadvantages.
    Use the $100+ cost of an EVF and you'd get a better pentaprism with
    changeable focusing screens.
    But an EVF also has lower contrast than a good optical systems and
    much lower resolution. It no better at focusing that an optical
    viewfinder and probably much worse.
    There is no power drain from an OVF.

    [...]
    Anything is possible with enough money. Do people want to spend that
    much on an EVF? Doesn't look like it.
     
    Ray Fischer, Jan 9, 2006
    #11
  12. Rich

    Charles Self Guest

    There are a couple long threads on EVF vs. OVF on DPReview's forums. Quite
    intense arguments from the EVF crowd that favors an all EVF world, all
    predicated on something that does not yet exist, a top quality EVF that
    comes close to matching an OVF. Most of it seems to center around the
    availability of a movable LCD, which is not the EVF anyway.
     
    Charles Self, Jan 9, 2006
    #12
  13. I don't know what kind of horrible cameras you use, but I have no problems
    with f/16.
     
    Philip Homburg, Jan 9, 2006
    #13
  14. Rich

    RichA Guest

    As EVFs are, yes, DSLR buyers don't like them. But don't be a stupid
    luddite, things
    change. Would you have bought a digital when the sported 256K pixel
    sensors?
     
    RichA, Jan 9, 2006
    #14
  15. Rich

    RichA Guest

    EVF is not the moveable LCD, cretin.
     
    RichA, Jan 9, 2006
    #15
  16. Rich

    RichA Guest

    RichA, Jan 9, 2006
    #16
  17. Rich

    Charles Self Guest

    Nor I. I wonder more about his eyesight if he thinks any of today's EVFs are
    better than my *istD, even at f/16.
     
    Charles Self, Jan 9, 2006
    #17
  18. Rich

    Gormless Guest

    pot, kettle, black.....
     
    Gormless, Jan 9, 2006
    #18
  19. I agree. I have an old Fuji 6900Z, a newer S700 both of which have EVFs.
    They don't come close to the optical viewfinders on my DSLR cameras. I
    wouldn't but a DSLR if it had an EVF.
     
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Jan 9, 2006
    #19
  20. Rich

    Rich Guest

    People who dismiss EVF are the same iditos who upon seeing some of the
    first digital cameras pronounced that they would never take over from
    film.
    -Rich
     
    Rich, Jan 9, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.