The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Good Bye OVF!

jfirneno

Member
I can't disagree with 10 years. But it's interesting to see how this interview was spun on the Sonyalpharumors site. They state "Sony clearly says that Optical Viewfinder DSLR are…dead." Whereas the actual interview states that Sony will give their customers what they will buy, whether DSLR, DSLT or mirrorless. And I believe that is accurate. Also the Sony rep clearly states that he is aware that many honest unbiased individuals still prefer SLR to SLT. So it is possible to see how Sony may see it within its own interests to replace the A850/A900 with a DSLR. Either way I do agree that in the long run the reflex mirror (moving or otherwise) will probably go away.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I can't disagree with 10 years. But it's interesting to see how this interview was spun on the Sonyalpharumors site.
They (sony, m4/3, mirrorless) seem do it deliberately to stir a debate. Sometimes good info passes by. That is all.

But the quote here is the actual headline from "imaging-resource" interview's headline.
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I suppose that ovfs will be around awhile unless they can match the three-dimensionality of an optical view. Simply seeing something that is out of focus on an evf is not nearly the same as having your eyes do the focusing for you selectively in different parts of the frame. The hybrid approach as in the x100 is one that I sincerely hope can be built into a more serious camera.
-bob
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Well, EVF/OVF debates will be a refreshing change to film/digital ones or APC/FF or more pixels/less pixels or Sony/Fuji...

What did photographers talk about before digital?
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
Well, EVF/OVF debates will be a refreshing change to film/digital ones or APC/FF or more pixels/less pixels or Sony/Fuji...

What did photographers talk about before digital?
oh, film, developers, special agitation techniques, how long to fix, should fixer removing agents be used or not, stop baths, water or acidic, two-part developers, film and film grain, the beauty of number 3 paper, toners, Metol allergies, recipes for mix-your own chemicals, e6 in the kitchen sink, home brew tweaks to E6, loading film carriers, fuming plates, coating plates, how to avoid dying from the cyanide fumes, paper surfaces, lenses, lenses, lenses, dye transfer home-brew buffer changes. the "real-man's" way to make an unsharp mask, masking in general, resolution, wondering when the film industry would get beyond 80 lines per mm, depth of field, view camera technique, arguments about composition, the "tastefulness" of nudes, home made wet-sink plans, film dryers, paper dryers, wetting solution, flattening agents, spotone, alternatives to spotone, goos retouching brushes, loupes, enlarger focusing aids, safelights, infrared film, best material to use for a dark cloth, shooting in the field and how much all this stuff weighs, tripods, locations to shoot, shutters, shutter calibration and repair, cable releases, viewing conditions, archival processes, and one or two hundred other things.
-bob
 

jfirneno

Member
oh, film, developers, special agitation techniques, how long to fix, should fixer removing agents be used or not, stop baths, water or acidic, two-part developers, film and film grain, the beauty of number 3 paper, toners, Metol allergies, recipes for mix-your own chemicals, e6 in the kitchen sink, home brew tweaks to E6, loading film carriers, fuming plates, coating plates, how to avoid dying from the cyanide fumes, paper surfaces, lenses, lenses, lenses, dye transfer home-brew buffer changes. the "real-man's" way to make an unsharp mask, masking in general, resolution, wondering when the film industry would get beyond 80 lines per mm, depth of field, view camera technique, arguments about composition, the "tastefulness" of nudes, home made wet-sink plans, film dryers, paper dryers, wetting solution, flattening agents, spotone, alternatives to spotone, goos retouching brushes, loupes, enlarger focusing aids, safelights, infrared film, best material to use for a dark cloth, shooting in the field and how much all this stuff weighs, tripods, locations to shoot, shutters, shutter calibration and repair, cable releases, viewing conditions, archival processes, and one or two hundred other things.
-bob
So basically whatever can be argued. Then all is right with the Brave New World that has such viewfinders in it. Seriously then, things may be actually becoming simpler!
 
V

Vivek

Guest
It is just coming back to complete a circle. The first cameras had real live-view!

OVF, external finders, zone focusing, TLRs, RFs, pentaprisms.. just muddled the picture. ;)
 

PeterA

Well-known member
All these toy cameras and their toy camera tech - is really funny! i am getting n perverse sort of pleasure reading all these toy camera forum posts and threads - I even bought a couple of toy cameras to play with - and confirmed to myself - yeah they are toys - not much better really than what an Iphone can do.:LOL:
 

douglasf13

New member
It is just coming back to complete a circle. The first cameras had real live-view!

OVF, external finders, zone focusing, TLRs, RFs, pentaprisms.. just muddled the picture. ;)
Yeah, totally. I find it interesting that some find it impossible to frame, focus and shoot with a little computer screen on the camera, yet they are able to tweak and process pictures for hours on their computer screens at home. :)

Don't get me wrong, I hate poor EVFs as much as the next guy, and there are things that I like about OVFs, but the new Sony EVF may be the tipping point.
 

jonoslack

Active member
All these toy cameras and their toy camera tech - is really funny! i am getting n perverse sort of pleasure reading all these toy camera forum posts and threads - I even bought a couple of toy cameras to play with - and confirmed to myself - yeah they are toys - not much better really than what an Iphone can do.:LOL:
Hi Peter
which toy cameras was that? Nikon V1?, NEX 5n? Fuji X100? Leica M9? IQ180?
 

jonoslack

Active member
Don't get me wrong, I hate poor EVFs as much as the next guy, and there are things that I like about OVFs, but the new Sony EVF may be the tipping point.
It is for me - There is a point at which all the extra information / exposure / white balance / depth of field / focus peaking . . . etc. . . . becomes attractive.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Hi Jono ( since you asked) :)

I define a toy camera as any camera bought by those so inclined and tossed in a few months when internet forum chatter has moved on to the next brand new priced cheap enough to buy and talk about for a few months toy - before selling and moving on to the next priced cheap enough to buy before selling in a few months when the next comes along ...etc etc etc

The definition of course says nothing about the camera's ability in the hands of a photographer to make a nice photograph or a passable snap.

but then we all know that that benchmark was achieved with the box brownie

On a more serious note.

My problem with even the best EVF today as in Sony - is the viewing size and clarity doesn't match the simplest rangefinder or mirror box tech of 50 years ago - even with the help of focus peeking and excellent autofocus - the simple fact of the matter is that I use a viewfinder primarily for compositional purposes not for focus - I am sure things will improve over time ...I will look at the tech again - when it delivers a level of clarity and brightness and size that I like.

Cheers
Pete
 

jonoslack

Active member
My problem with even the best EVF today as in Sony - is the viewing size and clarity doesn't match the simplest rangefinder or mirror box tech of 50 years ago - even with the help of focus peeking and excellent autofocus - the simple fact of the matter is that I use a viewfinder primarily for compositional purposes not for focus - I am sure things will improve over time ...I will look at the tech again - when it delivers a level of clarity and brightness and size that I like.

Cheers
Pete
Ah Peter . . . if you want to argue the benefits of an SLR viewfinder over an EVF I can argue back . . . but if you're arguing about a rangefinder, then I don't have a word to say! Seeing around the image is so important, and provides so much more information.

Still, although the NEX7 is MY current toy - I think it's a bit patronising to refer to it as a toy - it's certainly capable of producing great images.

but with respect to the original post . . . I really can see the mirror SLR being replace by the EVF over the next few years . . . but not the optical rangefinder.

One of the things which really impresses me about the Fuji X1-pro (another toy) is that they've realised the truth of the OVF and provided two different settings with proper framelines. I've always felt it would be nice if Leica produced a three setting RF window - but I suspect it's too difficult from a technical point of view.
 
Top