gho
Well-known
Im just curious about how you find the ergonomics of an electronic viewfinder compared to an optical viewfinder if you had the opportunity to use both systems.
Last edited:
Ergonomics of EVFs.
- Thread starter gho
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 7
- Views 265
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
I bought a GF-1 a few weeks ago. Pretty nice piece of kit but I just can't cope with framing using the LCD screen. So I just got the EVF for it.
Optically it's worse than a standard optical viewfinder and, frankly, I'll be relying on auto focus rather than the EVF to focus, but ergonomically I find it a big improvement in use, especially with the swivel.
Overall though, I'm preferring to stick with my Bessa R3/4 series film cameras and keep the GF-1 for those occasions when it's more suited.
Optically it's worse than a standard optical viewfinder and, frankly, I'll be relying on auto focus rather than the EVF to focus, but ergonomically I find it a big improvement in use, especially with the swivel.
Overall though, I'm preferring to stick with my Bessa R3/4 series film cameras and keep the GF-1 for those occasions when it's more suited.
JoeV
Thin Air, Bright Sun
I've had my G1 now for a bit over a year. It has the best viewfinder I've ever used, including SLR, medium and large format (well, okay, my 4x5 Speed Graphic is big, but the corners are dark).
I like being able to manually focus in extremely dim light with the G1's EVF. I like the 1 second review I've programmed the camera to display after each exposure. I like the autofocus area and exposure information available to me while I'm composing. I like viewing the image at the taking aperture and shutter speed ahead of the exposure. I even like the electronically-amplified image available under darkly-lit conditions, since it enables me to see well enough to actually focus and compose, something I wouldn't be able to do with an optical viewfinder.
Low-quality EVFs are yesterday; one shouldn't judge them by what past cameras have offered; high-quality EVFs are the future; if you haven't used a Lumix G1 or GH-1 you don't know what I'm talking about. It's like comparing a 1950's tubed TV with HDTV. And they will only get better with time.
~Joe
I like being able to manually focus in extremely dim light with the G1's EVF. I like the 1 second review I've programmed the camera to display after each exposure. I like the autofocus area and exposure information available to me while I'm composing. I like viewing the image at the taking aperture and shutter speed ahead of the exposure. I even like the electronically-amplified image available under darkly-lit conditions, since it enables me to see well enough to actually focus and compose, something I wouldn't be able to do with an optical viewfinder.
Low-quality EVFs are yesterday; one shouldn't judge them by what past cameras have offered; high-quality EVFs are the future; if you haven't used a Lumix G1 or GH-1 you don't know what I'm talking about. It's like comparing a 1950's tubed TV with HDTV. And they will only get better with time.
~Joe
palec
Well-known
I've tried G1 once at photo expo. It was standard kit with zoom lens. The light there was dim there and the view in EVF looked terrible, slow refresh rate, large amount of noise, low quality of detail. Maybe there are settings to adjust the EVF to make it work, but I had no interest in finding them and the panasonic agent had no clue.
Is it something you have experienced, too, and was able to adjust?
Axel
singleshooter
There are a lot of questions how somebody compares EVFs and
optical viewfinders.
What is ergonomics?
When I use my camera to get quick pictures and need the viewfinder
only to compose the frame no EVF will top a goodoptical viewfinder.
When I use my viewfinder to focus quick and exactly there will
be no EVF today that tops a rangefinder or a good SLR-finder.
When I use my camera in germany this days to go out and take
a longer walk I won´t rely on any electric or electronic camera
because of the low temperatures and strong wind 😉
Otherwise there are a lot of advantages that EVFs can have
for special situations.
I think ergonomics even depends on the use and the user...
optical viewfinders.
What is ergonomics?
When I use my camera to get quick pictures and need the viewfinder
only to compose the frame no EVF will top a goodoptical viewfinder.
When I use my viewfinder to focus quick and exactly there will
be no EVF today that tops a rangefinder or a good SLR-finder.
When I use my camera in germany this days to go out and take
a longer walk I won´t rely on any electric or electronic camera
because of the low temperatures and strong wind 😉
Otherwise there are a lot of advantages that EVFs can have
for special situations.
I think ergonomics even depends on the use and the user...
Last edited:
thegman
Veteran
Surely EVF vs. OVF can only be judged on a case by case basis, I've had a play with a G1 and the EVF was quite strikingly good, better than maybe the OVF on a cheap Olympus DSLR I also played with (can't remember model number), but not even close to as good as the ZI finder.
xxloverxx
Shoot.
Tried a load of EVF cameras last Christmas in Tokyo. Didn't like one of them - I just find it far too cluttered and the response too slow when moving the camera.
user237428934
User deletion pending
I own a G1, so I can give some first hand impression. Perhaps it makes sense to differentiate between features and quality.
Features: preview of exposure, manual focus magnification etc. are features that are very useful and they are implemented very well. I am only missing a manual focus confirmation.
Quality: the quality depends on the resolution and refresh rate. Sometimes the resolution is still not high enough to see fine details, but in good lighting situations the quality is most of the time absolutely sufficent. When it comes to available light photography the quality of the EVF is not sufficient anymore (at least for me). The refresh rate drops and it's hard to see things that are in movement. It might still be ok for static things in low light.
A clear viewfinder (RF or SLR) that works in low light situations is more important for me than all the features of an EVF.
So overall for me it's still the option "worse" in this poll.
Features: preview of exposure, manual focus magnification etc. are features that are very useful and they are implemented very well. I am only missing a manual focus confirmation.
Quality: the quality depends on the resolution and refresh rate. Sometimes the resolution is still not high enough to see fine details, but in good lighting situations the quality is most of the time absolutely sufficent. When it comes to available light photography the quality of the EVF is not sufficient anymore (at least for me). The refresh rate drops and it's hard to see things that are in movement. It might still be ok for static things in low light.
A clear viewfinder (RF or SLR) that works in low light situations is more important for me than all the features of an EVF.
So overall for me it's still the option "worse" in this poll.