Try manual focussing with an EVF! (I am over 40 and wear glasses, so perhaps I am not the best person to ask!)..
Stephenhampshire wrote:.
Try manual focussing with an EVF! (I am over 40 and wear glasses, soperhaps I am not the best person to ask!).
Personally I think EVF's will be the future. But it ain't here yet. Certainly for a dSLR looking at the monitor will NEVER be a viable way to shoot..
EVF's as a substitute for an optical viewfinder will be a very nice improvement. When they get better..
Dave..
Stephenhampshire wrote:.
Try manual focussing with an EVF! (I am over 40 and wear glasses, soperhaps I am not the best person to ask!).
And do that in bright sunlight! .
Edvinas..
From pressing the shutter to taking the picture is shorter because....
You are not waiting for LCD VF to build a pre-view image... And "Live" LCD VFs have a more lag time than most of us DSLR user want at the moment..
With NO "Live" preview, the DSLR is as fast to use as a Film SLR. So, when you press the shutter button with no delays, you get a picture with no delays in the capture process..
Now, P/S and Bridge Cams have come a L O N G way too. But there is still is small delay. For some, A small delay is not wanted..
I think, in the near future, (2-4 years), we will see DSLRs (entry level anyway), have Live LCD VF PLUS the Mirror VF too...I don't see the mirror box being abandoned any time soon..
The VF brightness IS FAR superior to any LCD VF right now. And a Bright VF is needed for Manual Focusing, like in low light, where you may not want a Focus assist beam lighting up..
The Oly has "live Preview" and is an SLR, and some like it as it is. But It will get better in time. A few more generations of development should nail it down for use as standard feature on DSLR's. Possibly with a "on/off" function as the Olys..
'Well, Good Luck With That' (SpongeBob SquarePants).
Peter .
Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.
Enjoy your photography images, even if your wife doesn't ! ;-(http://laurence-photography.com/http://www.pbase.com/peterarbib/Cameras in profile...
I am over 40 and I wear glasses too, and I have tried using an EVF for manual focusing. Now I'm probably a little spoiled, because the Fuji S9100 has a very good EVF, but it is possible to manually focus relatively painlessly..
I'm long sighted, so I don't wear glasses to photograph, just the dioper on the EVF, so maybe that's the difference..
Frankly I'm a little skeptical that people can focus as well as they think they can manually on an OVF. I have not done this much, but it strikes me as a black art in it's own right. Maybe it's just a thing that gets better with practice..
StephenG.
Fuji S9600Fuji S5200Fuji F30Fuji E900Canon A710ISPCLinuxOS..
Sjgcit wrote:.
Frankly I'm a little skeptical that people can focus as well as theythink they can manually on an OVF..
It's not a black art if you're using a manual-focus film camera with a fast (f/1.x) lens; a large, bright, ground-glass viewfinder; and the sort of good focusing aids that were common for such viewfinders...
Leejay Wu wrote:.
Search, search, search in case..
Did, tried, and found nothing related to this specific question. Many posts about what an SLR is, and how it works... but none that addressed my question of why we still use them..
The answers given, however, are pretty good. I can understand the professional's need for manual focusing, though I will state as my fellow Fuji-user stated, I don't find it to be a big deal using the EVF on my S5000 either. My biggest issues with EVFs and LCDs is the poor exposure correlation (ie, I don't know if it came out well or not... the image in the EVF/LCD doesn't look quite like the image on the PC from an exposure perspective. But that's neither here nor there..
As for bright sunlight, I have no problem using my EVF in bright sunlight... it's just like using a viewfinder anyway. And I certainly don't notice much lag, if any, on the EVF image... but the shutter lag, I do notice - man that's annoying..
Anyway, I think my question is answered. EVF/LCD isn't quite "perfect" for some, hence the desire for an SLR mechanism. Looks like I will stick to a non-dSLR for my needs... now if only I could get an SLR-Like camera with a larger dSLR CCD... then I'd be much happier!.
Thanks for the quick, consise answers!..
Schwinn wrote:.
Did, tried, and found nothing related to this specific question..
Well, this IS the Beginners Questions forum so I would imagine that you wouldn't know what to search for. Try "EVIL" (Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens)..
Many posts about what an SLR is.
Well, what makes an SLR a "Reflex" camera is that it has a mirror (the word "reflex" indicates that the image is "reflected"). Okay, technically it doesn't need to be a mirror; a few cameras use a prism for the purpose. But anyway, if you remove the mirror you don't have an SLR any longer..
The colloquial term for the (thus far nonexistent) EVF-based camera for serious photography is EVIL. I'm one of the folks who believes that EVIL will rapidly push SLR into a niche position along with view cameras, once EVFs become good enough..
If only I could get an SLR-Like camera with a larger dSLR CCD....
Sony made one called the R1. It's out of production now, though.(http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscr1/)..
The simple answer is because the alternatives are either not practical yet or not cost-effective..
Right now, an EVF lacks the resolution and the instantaneous access of an optical viewfinder. The resolution of fine detail prevents it from being adopted by the landscape fraternity and the instant access pushes it out the wish list of portrait, fashion, news and sport photographers (even 'you saw it, you missed it' gives you some indication of what you are taking, when). Both of these objections to the EVF could dissolve with time..
The other alternative is the pellicle mirror. This is semi silvered and stays in place. You lose a bit less than a stop, the VF is darker and the thing needs to be kept extremely clean, but I've always thought this a fine alternative to the flapping mirror..
It costs a lot, though.You name it, I've broken it...
Http://forums.dpreview.com/...forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=21039257.
Which asks your exact question"I was pondering....
Point and shoot digitals seem to perform metering and focus without a mirror/prism viewfinder. I assume they all use the CCD for metering and focus, hence the always-on LCD preview..
Why then, does a Dig SLR need a flip up mirror and separate viewfinder? Cant the SLR camera just keep the CCD open to perform through the lens preview, focus, and exposure? It seems to me the mirror and viewfinder are pointless carryovers from 35mm.Please educate me... "..
An EVF is for those who love to charge batteries .
Enjoying to try making better images again and again and .....
Exactly, some day they may replace the mirror, but right now they don't come close. Both the resolution and the time delay between what happens and the camera adjusting aren't up to a pro level yet..
Given that canon has managed to flip the mirror 10 times a second on the mark III, it'll probably be a while before evfs compete on a pro level..
Chato wrote:.
Stephenhampshire wrote:.
Try manual focussing with an EVF! (I am over 40 and wear glasses, soperhaps I am not the best person to ask!).
Personally I think EVF's will be the future. But it ain't here yet.Certainly for a dSLR looking at the monitor will NEVER be a viableway to shoot..
EVF's as a substitute for an optical viewfinder will be a very niceimprovement. When they get better..
Dave..
Schwinn wrote:.
The answers given, however, are pretty good. I can understand theprofessional's need for manual focusing, though I will state as myfellow Fuji-user stated, I don't find it to be a big deal using theEVF on my S5000 either. My biggest issues with EVFs and LCDs is thepoor exposure correlation (ie, I don't know if it came out well ornot... the image in the EVF/LCD doesn't look quite like the image onthe PC from an exposure perspective. But that's neither here northere..
As for bright sunlight, I have no problem using my EVF in brightsunlight... it's just like using a viewfinder anyway. And I certainlydon't notice much lag, if any, on the EVF image... but the shutterlag, I do notice - man that's annoying..
People spend thousands of dollars for an "edge." Right now, an EVF can take any picture that an OVF can, but in many cases with far more difficulty..
Low light?.
How about tracking a high speed bird? Those little after images left by todays EVF's can be distracting... .
Having used EVF's, they are very nice, but NOT ready for prime time. I certainly didn't buy a dSLR to miss shots here and there..
When the EVF limitations are overcome, I'll be first on line. Right now they are not there yet..
As for shooting off the LCD monitor. It was successfully proved that with a little P&S camera it is quite possible. Not with my camera and lens. I've spent quite a bit of time working on my technique so that I can be steady with the camera pressed to my face. Arms lenght with THIS camera? I wont miss a few shots, I'll miss them all... .
Dave..
An EVF also means, that you have to run the sensor alll the time and also expose it to light (& heat) all the time.A warmer sensor produces more noise.To many people higher ISO with less noise is an very important feature of dslrs..
Just to sum up what i've seen so far:- Less resolution- Less fps- More battery drain- More noise(- Arguably worse low light performance).
+ Information Overlay+ More accurate display (in terms of white balance).
To me the bad outweights the good..
Since I usually check the back LCD of my camera for the first few shots in a different session and adjust wite balance, exposure correction etc., I don't really need the information overlay and accurate representation. If I know that it is a tricky situation, i'd rather have a 3" LCD showing me seperate histograms for RGB an additonal information, when I want to see it..
Bye,Philip..
One of reasons many regard the EVF (or even the LCD) of a digicam as being inferior to that of an Optical Veiwfinder (OVF) is that the EVF/LCD has a very low resolution, or at least a resolution that isn't high enough to make fine manual focus adjustments relatively easy to do..
However, that doesn't need to the case. And I am quite surprised that today we are still using EVF/LCDs with resolutions as low as approximately 200K, even the super top of the range (and very expensive) Canon 1D Mk III has an LCD with a measly low resolution of around 235K. As I said, these low resolutions don't need to be the norm, as Konica Minolta showed some time ago by producing a camera with an EVF that had a resolution of nearly 1 Megapixal: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/konicaminoltaa2/page3.asp.
Of course, the major problem an EVF has is dealing with low light situations. The human eye, looking through an OVF, is WAY MORE sensitive to light and can focus and see in conditions that an EVF will never be able to cope with (although the Sony F and V Series cams are able to see and focus in TOTAL DARKNESS provided you use the camera in semi auto mode)..
Gosh, I've been reduced to silence by this one. I very much want to post something, but I don't know where to begin. There is so much mis-information and prejudice, I can't begin to comment before I exceed Phil's limit..
I'm going to ignore all the dumb posts and stick to what the OP asked: Why does the mirror box camera still exist?.
Because it is going away SLOWLY...evolution, not revolution. The first step is to make dSLRs that have live preview on the LCD.
Oly already has 3 Live LCD cameras and Panasonic, Leica, and Canon each have one. They all seem to be taking a non-obvious approach: They started introducing live preview at the top end. Hmmm.
Sony had one, the R1, which unlike the others was a Live EVF/LCD camera..
I see the mirror box as going away. The advantages of building a fully electronic SLR are just too compelling for it to last much longer. The real question is who will produce the first EVIL camera? And when?.
BTW, I prefer the handle eSLR rather than EVIL (which was coined by someone opposed to this concept)..
So, you ask, what are those compelling reasons for dropping the mirror box?.
1. Cost. The mirror, mirror mechanism, pentaprism/pentamirror, focusing screen are not cheapand they are difficult to adjust.2. Reliability. An electronic-reflex design would be VERY reliable..
3. Allows use of short-back-focus lenses, which facilitate GREAT IQ at moderate cost.4. Noise. The mirror and focal-plane shutter make a LOT of noise..
5. Speed. An electronic-shutter camera can be an order of magnitide faster than a mechanical-shutter camera.6. Preview of the image, showing WB, focus, and composition..
7. Can show other data on VF screenthings like live histogram and live over-exposure indications..
#1 and #2 are the reasons manufacturers will adopt it. The others are the reasons we will buy it. #3 is the snag....
When the mirror box goes away, one of the big advantages is that lenses can now be mounted close to the sensor. This saves money and space. However, nobody has any 35mm/APS-C short-back-focus lens designswell, Sony has the excellent Carl Zeiss lens in the R1but thats the only one. On second thought, there are probably some old rangefinder lens designs that might be resurected?..
To make the switch to an EVF requires having SBF lenses. All fixed-lens cameras have SBF lenses, but all removable-lens camera have LBF designs. Designing a new set of lenses is a substantial investment. First, there are only 7 qualified lens designers in the whole world. And 3 of them are tired old men. It will take 10 years to redesign all the lenses that manufacturers have in their arsenals.
So the catch-22 is that they need the cost and space advantages of SBF lenses to justify using an EVF, but cant afford the expense of designing a lot of SBF lenses quickly..
Thus, my prediction that the first EVIL camera system will use both LBF and SBF lenses. Economics dictates that it be that way. After customers experience the real advantages of SBF lenses (especially WA versions), then manufacturers can afford to design new SBF lensesslowly..
Thus the time line will be something like:.
1. Produce Bridge cams with live histogram in EVF [done]2. Design some Bridge cams with APS-C size sensors [done]3. Design some SBF lenses for APS-C sensors. [got 1...need more]4. Add Live LCD to some dSLR cameras [done]5.
Design a fast, hybrid AF system (part Phase...part Contrast)...7. Produce a paradigm busting eSLR at the very top of the professional end!.
Gradually, the technology will descend to the masses, but it needs to start at the top. Professionals will be quicker to appreciate the new paradigm and will adopt it easily. If the pros like it, the dumb amateur wannabees will too..
As much as I dislike Sony as a company, they are positioned properly to do this. The R1 was the 2nd step. There needs to be an R2 with a different lens...something like 50-250mm equivalent (step 3). Next they need to do an R3 that allows either of these SBF lenses to be used (step 4). Then an R4 that also accepts LBF lenses from the Alpha/Konica/Minolta lines. Somewhere along the way, they need that EVF from the A2...except make it faster.
The R5 will be outstanding. Great IQ, small, blazing speed, live histogram, etc. Then, go bigger, with a 1.5X APS sensor (instead of the 1.7X in the R1). Finally, put it all together in a $5000 pro camera:.
Medium sized camera (pros don't like toys)..
Removable lenses...both SBF and LBF designs..
Totally quiet..
Fast...AF in 50 mS...shutter in 2 mS...30 FPS burst rate (no difference between still and video?).
Built-in GPS, bluetooth, and wireless internet..
Wireless (non-optical) flash system (even on the body...no contact problems)..
Massive memory..
Big battery..
Adjustable ergonomics (EVF on either side...LCD movable from top to back...LCD rotates and twists...accessory handles to fit any size hands...).
It may take 10 years?.
Charlie DavisNikon 5700 & Sony R1HomePage: http://www.1derful.infoBridge Blog: http://www.here-ugo.com/BridgeBlog/..
I didn't see some of thse things, so I will chime in quickly..
1. Battery life, SLR users are very trigger heavy and would prefer to use the power for exposures rather than for an EVF.
2. Try determining the subtlies with some of the more popular filters out there. Remember that an EVF has a limited color space compared to your eye. For example I use circular polarizers and Blue/Gold polarizers and they require a little finer color definition than can be reproduced by an EVF..
3. DOF preview. I suppose this could be seen on an EVF, but I would think it would be more difficult. And at really small fstops like F/22, it might be hard to see. Even with Fuji's supurb capabilities, I have to wonder if would work that well. Remember that the senso on the average SLR as an order of magnatude larger than that of the average camera using EVF and as a result there is a greater range for DOF on an SLR..
4. Speed and price. The EVFs in the new SLRs - and it is not just in the entry level (check out what Canon is doing here) - are either very limited or require a smaller second sensor placed somewhere in the light path(Olympus and Panasonic/Leica solution). This is to avoid having the image sensor do double duty and keep the lag issues out of the SLR world. Try to do 8 or 10 FPS on an EVF type camera... another technological limitation given how the sensor is "piped"..
5. While I like the idea of an EVF, there is a viseral need on my part to see the subject through the viewfinder. This is quite subjective, I just like it. .
6. and lastly, we like that assuring mechanical sound that tells us that the picture has been taken. Probably old fasioned, but it reassures those of us who are disconcerted by the non SLR type cameras..
Until an EVF can provide resolution, color range and brightness that can beat an SLR viewfinder, the SLR will live on..
Personnally, I like both systems and always carry a very light subcompact camera that uses it's LCD as an EVF for certain shots along with my big and heavy SLR and that is why EVFs have a great future. My final thought is that there is pleanty of room in the market for both!.
Roger..
Rmcovering wrote:.
I didn't see some of thse things, so I will chime in quickly..
1. Battery life, SLR users are very trigger heavy and would prefer touse the power for exposures rather than for an EVF.
Have you considered how much energy the motors for the mirror and shutter consume? It's substantial..
2. Try determining the subtlies with some of the more popular filtersout there. Remember that an EVF has a limited color space comparedto your eye. For example I use circular polarizers and Blue/Goldpolarizers and they require a little finer color definition than canbe reproduced by an EVF..
If this is a serious issue for many users, there are MANY types of LCD displays. Some have excellent color fidelity..
3. DOF preview. I suppose this could be seen on an EVF, but I wouldthink it would be more difficult. And at really small fstops likeF/22, it might be hard to see. Even with Fuji's supurb capabilities,I have to wonder if would work that well. Remember that the senso onthe average SLR as an order of magnatude larger than that of theaverage camera using EVF and as a result there is a greater range forDOF on an SLR..
The sensor on a SLR with an EVF probably will be the same size sensor as before. Don't compare EVF + small sensor with OVF + large sensor. That's unfair and wrong..
4. Speed and price. The EVFs in the new SLRs - and it is not just inthe entry level (check out what Canon is doing here) - are eithervery limited or require a smaller second sensor placed somewhere inthe light path(Olympus and Panasonic/Leica solution). This is toavoid having the image sensor do double duty and keep the lag issuesout of the SLR world. Try to do 8 or 10 FPS on an EVF type camera...another technological limitation given how the sensor is "piped"..
None of the cameras you are mentioning have an EVF. They all have OVFs. They DO have an LCD display on the back. It is NOT a VF. The live preview on them is shown on the LCD on the back, not via the OVF. Duh!.
CMOS sensors do not "pipe" data. They are random access devices. There is NO technical reason why an SLR with a CMOS sensor and a EVF could not easily exceed that 10 FPS limit on mechanical cameras...and do it quietly..
5. While I like the idea of an EVF, there is a viseral need on mypart to see the subject through the viewfinder. This is quitesubjective, I just like it. .
I agree that you like it. I think you will also like the future EVFs. You will need some time to purge your soul of those old memories. .
6. and lastly, we like that assuring mechanical sound that tells usthat the picture has been taken. Probably old fasioned, but itreassures those of us who are disconcerted by the non SLR typecameras..
You also like the feel of the mirror flopping in and out at 10 Hz. This can be simulated on an eSLR with a small speaker and a vibrator. AND you can turn off this noise and vibration when it scares small children/political candidates/wild animals or shakes the camera so much you need a gyro-stabilized platform to get sharp pictures..
Until an EVF can provide resolution, color range and brightness thatcan beat an SLR viewfinder, the SLR will live on..
Actually, it only has to show the photographer enough to frame the shot, be able to manually focus, and insure that a properly exposed picture will result..
Personnally, I like both systems and always carry a very lightsubcompact camera that uses it's LCD as an EVF for certain shots alongwith my big and heavy SLR and that is why EVFs have a great future..
An external LCD is NOT a substitute for a VF! An EVF is VERY MUCH like an OVF. It is used the same way (with the camera pressed to the face of the photographer). It has no issues with ambient light. When we get a GOOD EVF, the LCD on the back of SLRs will go away...they are just a stop-gap measure..
My final thought is that there is pleanty of room in the market forboth!.
Yes. But the mirror box is legacy technology. There are much better ways to do the same thing in the 21st century....
Charlie DavisNikon 5700 & Sony R1HomePage: http://www.1derful.infoBridge Blog: http://www.here-ugo.com/BridgeBlog/..
Chuxter wrote:.
Gosh, I've been reduced to silence by this one. I very much want topost something, but I don't know where to begin. There is so muchmis-information and prejudice, I can't begin to comment before Iexceed Phil's limit..
I'm going to ignore all the dumb posts and stick to what the OPasked: Why does the mirror box camera still exist?.
Because it is going away SLOWLY...evolution, not revolution. Thefirst step is to make dSLRs that have live preview on the LCD.
Oly already has 3 Live LCD cameras and Panasonic, Leica, and Canoneach have one. They all seem to be taking a non-obvious approach:They started introducing live preview at the top end. Hmmm.
Sony had one, the R1, which unlike the others was a Live EVF/LCD camera..
I see the mirror box as going away. The advantages of building afully electronic SLR are just too compelling for it to last muchlonger. The real question is who will produce the first EVIL camera?And when?.
BTW, I prefer the handle eSLR rather than EVIL (which was coinedby someone opposed to this concept)..
So, you ask, what are those compelling reasons for dropping themirror box?.
1. Cost. The mirror, mirror mechanism, pentaprism/pentamirror,focusing screen are not cheapand they are difficult to adjust.2. Reliability. An electronic-reflex design would be VERY reliable.3. Allows use of short-back-focus lenses, which facilitate GREAT IQat moderate cost.4.
The mirror and focal-plane shutter make a LOT of noise.5. Speed. An electronic-shutter camera can be an order of magnitidefaster than a mechanical-shutter camera.6. Preview of the image, showing WB, focus, and composition.7. Can show other data on VF screenthings like live histogram andlive over-exposure indications..
#1 and #2 are the reasons manufacturers will adopt it. The others arethe reasons we will buy it. #3 is the snag....
When the mirror box goes away, one of the big advantages is thatlenses can now be mounted close to the sensor. This saves money andspace. However, nobody has any 35mm/APS-C short-back-focus lensdesignswell, Sony has the excellent Carl Zeiss lens in the R1butthats the only one. On second thought, there are probably some oldrangefinder lens designs that might be resurected?..
To make the switch to an EVF requires having SBF lenses. Allfixed-lens cameras have SBF lenses, but all removable-lens camerahave LBF designs. Designing a new set of lenses is a substantialinvestment. First, there are only 7 qualified lens designers in thewhole world. And 3 of them are tired old men. It will take 10 yearsto redesign all the lenses that manufacturers have in their arsenals.Some of the lens designers will die in the process.
Thus, my prediction that the first EVIL camera system will use bothLBF and SBF lenses. Economics dictates that it be that way. Aftercustomers experience the real advantages of SBF lenses (especially WAversions), then manufacturers can afford to design new SBFlensesslowly..
Thus the time line will be something like:.
1. Produce Bridge cams with live histogram in EVF [done]2. Design some Bridge cams with APS-C size sensors [done]3. Design some SBF lenses for APS-C sensors. [got 1...need more]4. Add Live LCD to some dSLR cameras [done]5.
Design a fast, hybrid AF system (part Phase...part Contrast)...7. Produce a paradigm busting eSLR at the very top of theprofessional end!.
Gradually, the technology will descend to the masses, but it needs tostart at the top. Professionals will be quicker to appreciate the newparadigm and will adopt it easily. If the pros like it, the dumbamateur wannabees will too..
As much as I dislike Sony as a company, they are positioned properlyto do this. The R1 was the 2nd step. There needs to be an R2 with adifferent lens...something like 50-250mm equivalent (step 3). Nextthey need to do an R3 that allows either of these SBF lenses to beused (step 4). Then an R4 that also accepts LBF lenses from theAlpha/Konica/Minolta lines. Somewhere along the way, they need thatEVF from the A2...except make it faster.
The R5 will be outstanding. Great IQ,small, blazing speed, live histogram, etc. Then, go bigger, with a1.5X APS sensor (instead of the 1.7X in the R1). Finally, put it alltogether in a $5000 pro camera:.
Medium sized camera (pros don't like toys)..
Removable lenses...both SBF and LBF designs..
Totally quiet..
Fast...AF in 50 mS...shutter in 2 mS...30 FPS burst rate (nodifference between still and video?).
Built-in GPS, bluetooth, and wireless internet..
Wireless (non-optical) flash system (even on the body...no contactproblems)..
Massive memory..
Big battery..
Adjustable ergonomics (EVF on either side...LCD movable from top toback...LCD rotates and twists...accessory handles to fit any sizehands...).
It may take 10 years?.
Excellent analysis. Nothing for me to add to that really..
...