Next Generation Electronic Viewfinders

[bwcolor]

Another thread linked to this excellent set of observations:

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u..._Frame__Roger_Hicks_backfromfront_305734.html

It seems that this technology is limited by both display and sensor technology. I was hoping that some of you might be able to post URL's that show us what the future might look like through the next generations of electronic viewfinder. How close are we to optically bound shooters being happy looking through these viewfinders?

 

[igi]

I thought the current EVF's are good? I've never used one but most people say that only the Panasonic EVF for the GF-1 is actually bad. In fact, Roger is the only has I've heard that has such disdain for EVF...

 

[bwcolor]

Maybe you should do a bit more research and you will find many preferring optical viewfinders. A good example would be the manifest excitement surrounding the Fujifilm X100. Perhaps, Roger comes from a strong point of view, but these viewfinders do leave much to be desired. I suggest that you run out and do some hands on research and see what you think. For me, I could live with an EVF, but much prefer optical at this stage of development. BTW.. When this technology ripens, there will no longer be a need for mirror reflex systems, nor optical rangefinders. I should add that the technology presently centers around CMOS sensors, so we lose whatever CCD brings to the table.

 

[igi]

Maybe you should do a bit more research and you will find many preferring optical viewfinders. A good example would be the manifest excitement surrounding the Fujifilm X100. Perhaps, Roger comes from a strong point of view, but these viewfinders do leave much to be desired. I suggest that you run out and do some hands on research and see what you think. For me, I could live with an EVF, but much prefer optical at this stage of development.

Yes, I know and even I prefer OVF's because "it ain't broke, why change it?"

I'm just saying that another group of credible people think that the current EVF's are good ie. they're not spasmic, pixelated machines of yesteryear. Roger is no doubt credible, but for this issue, I choose not to touch the kettle because I can see steam coming out of it😉

 

[kbg32]

There is nothing wrong with Panasonic's EVF. It works.

 

[GSNfan]

An IBM computer named Watson beat two Jeopardy champions quite convincingly.

Or in other words, its a bit too late to stem the tide of technological progress.

EVFs are the future, all they have to do is increase the refresh rate, which is not that big of a deal.

 

[ampguy]

This device looks interesting, for dslr users, especially video users:

http://www.zacuto.com/zfinderevf

My biggest concern with the combo optical/evf is the switching between optical and evf, if the optical is going to show more than the capture area, while the evf shows the whole image, then you're swapping between mag ratios as well as focus points when you say compose with optical, then switch to evf for focus, and back. This has already been mentioned as a quirky experience by some X100 pre-production reviews.

I don't understand Roger's 2nd paragraph where he is talking about the EVF, then goes into issues with the big display on the back of the camera. Even my 2004 or 2005 EVF camera (Lumix FZ3) has a toggle for either EVF or back display, so I would assume that the back display can be turned off on most newer EVF cameras?? no?

 

[bwcolor]

Perhaps this issue looms larger with those of us that are older. In the "old days" reflex viewfinders were bright. The Ikon has the best of present day rangefinder viewfinders. Autofocus SLRs have less bright views of the world. Perhaps, the old folks got spoiled and the EVFs just don't provide that clarity, which might be of even greater value as our eyes age. We can use all the help that we can get. So, younger photographers may 'view' things from a different perspective.

Any other links to the future of EVFs?

 

[Nikon Bob]

Having used a Panny FZ50 for a month long trip, I can say that that particular EVF was practical for daily use but it did have limitations. Keep in mind that this is old EVF tech too. I am sure that EVFs will eventually improve to the point where there will be very few quibbles. Remember people still quibble about which OVF is better and why and that is a mature tech. I look forward to the day when we have a FF mirror less and rangefinder less digital still camera with a good EVF. The Fuji X100 seems to be a step in the right direction, to me anyway.

Bob

 

[Roger Hicks]

The column was based on the best EVFs I saw at photokina, and on the opinions of the salesmen who were puffing them. None of them pretended that the best EVF was as good as optical -- yet.

Sure, one day they'll be great, as I say in the column: One day, probably in the not-too-distant future, electronic viewfinders (EVFs) will be wonderful. They will be every bit as good as an optical unit, with the option of showing whatever information you want, right there in the viewfinder. And, if the camera manufacturers program their software right, you'll be able to turn off the information you don't want, and even zoom in for focusing.

Right now, I'll stick with optical, thanks. Anyone who thinks EVFs are currently good is using a different definition of 'good' from mine (and bwcolor's). Usable: yes. Good: no.

Cheers,

R.

 

[archeophoto]

I couldn't disagree more! Optical viewfinders are the future. Your eyes are not electronic, they are analog optical. And that's what your camera's viewfinder should be.
I don't get it... Why would we try to emulate something that has been proven by nature for millions of years.

I had a funny encounter last summer. I had my Rolleicord with me and a bunch of 16 year old kids wanted to see that weird looking camera. I had a little fun with them and said it's a new digital camera. They looked down at the ground glass (it's a Maxwell screen) and they were just amazed by the "wicked quality of that LCD, man!"

There you have your answer right there. This is the ultimate generation of new (old) viewfinders!

An IBM computer named Watson beat two Jeopardy champions quite convincingly.

Or in other words, its a bit too late to stem the tide of technological progress.

EVFs are the future, all they have to do is increase the refresh rate, which is not that big of a deal.

 

[sojournerphoto]

Anyone who thinks EVFs are currently good is using a different definition of 'good' from mine (and bwcolor's).

Cheers,

R.

I couldn't agree more. One day may be they'll be fine, but for now they are not as good to use.

 

[sojournerphoto]

Roger, Just read your complete aarticle Roger. Loved the bit about maybe some people prefer the TV view to reality. I do wonder if we are heading rapidly in that direction as digital synthesised 'alternative realities' become the norm in the cinema and elsewhere and poor old normal reality seems somewhat lack lustre in comparison.



Mike

 

[PatrickT]

After all of the talk about the Olympus EVFs for their PEN cameras, I decided to take a look at one. Short story...not impressed. Like Roger said, they're usable, but not good. For me, they don't even come close to the quality of a good optical finder. Someday, yes....currently, no.

 

[JoeV]

For my money and purposes, the EVF in the Lumix G1 is plenty good enough, and also does things that the best optical VFs don't, like 100% preview of DOF, 100% accurate framing at all focal distances and image preview in JPEG mode (like previewing the scene in Panasonic's Dynamic Black & White mode). However, being TTL, it does have that momentary blanking of the image at the moment of exposure, something in common with optical SLR systems.

Having said that, I believe that optical viewfinders are also technological in nature, not just EVFs; sometimes we forget that technology extends to areas far beyond "mere" electronics. The fact of Fuji's development of the X100 hybrid viewfinder is proof enough.

~Joe

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I find the EVF of the EP2 to be "amazing", and have stated as such. It is certainly not as good as an optical viewfinder. I've watched Digital Imaging and Display technology evolve for over 30 years now. I find it amazing that this level of display can be reduced to the size and cost that it is. I have a $3,000 IBM Professional Graphics Monitor bought in the 80s that could do 640x480 and display Analog RGB. This was 5 years before VGA. The "PGC" graphics card that went with it was $4,000 or so. Writing software for it on the side paid for my new Car over 20 years ago.

The EP2 EVF does have lag, needs to have a 7x mag used for focus- which is annoying. If I were writing the firmware, the 7x Mag would be center spot only, like on an SLR with a focus aid in the center.

 

[Frank Petronio]

I think the "old obsolete" Pany G1 has an amazing EVF that is superior to anything short of a much higher end full-frame DSLR. The way the EVF is implemented in the Fuji X100 seems the best of both optical and EVF... the compromise here is the SLR OVF.

I can preview the DOF on an EVF far easier than on a DSLR. I can review images and control everything with the camera to my eye in bright sun, which is impossible with a DSLR OVF or even an M9.

Also I don't need my reading glasses or to be switching back and forth with a EVF, I can see everything without my glasses, which is a huge convenience.

Bring on on. But more like the Pany or better please, no cheapskates.

 

[bwcolor]

I think that I can conclude, by the lack of response regarding the next generation of EVFs, that none of us are aware of that breakthrough product. So, we have evolution and not revolution.

Also, I think that all of us could agree that present day EVFs can be used to good result, but I think that some of us are stuck with long term memory of what it looks like to use quality optical finders.

I recall a running debate with one of the members regarding rear LCDs. He was 38 and I.. well, not 38. He found his X1 to be a great tool and I was arguing that some of us have problems seeing the screen.. It isn't just the distance, but the position.. holding it in an awkward altitude for bifocal/trifocal/PAL viewing. Others wear glasses and have a differing experience with optical viewfinders from those that don't wear, or don't need glasses for distance viewing. So, there will never be agreement on many of these topics.

 

[Roger Hicks]

This device looks interesting, for dslr users, especially video users:

http://www.zacuto.com/zfinderevf

My biggest concern with the combo optical/evf is the switching between optical and evf, if the optical is going to show more than the capture area, while the evf shows the whole image, then you're swapping between mag ratios as well as focus points when you say compose with optical, then switch to evf for focus, and back. This has already been mentioned as a quirky experience by some X100 pre-production reviews.

I don't understand Roger's 2nd paragraph where he is talking about the EVF, then goes into issues with the big display on the back of the camera. Even my 2004 or 2005 EVF camera (Lumix FZ3) has a toggle for either EVF or back display, so I would assume that the back display can be turned off on most newer EVF cameras?? no?

What I meant was that on lower-end cameras they'll probably drop the back screens once EVFs are good enough, as a cost saving measure, and then we'll have cameras with eye-level finders once more.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Nikon Bob]

I can preview the DOF on an EVF far easier than on a DSLR. I can review images and control everything with the camera to my eye in bright sun, which is impossible with a DSLR OVF or even an M9.

This is so true. I had a few DSLR users wondering what I was photographing when I was reviewing shots I had just taken in the bright African sun in the EVF of my FZ50. I am sure it would not be so easy with the screen on the back of my D700 in similar circumstances.

The EVFs are not as good as OVfs yet but are not totally useless as some would have you believe.

Bob