OVF vs EVF

edgedemon

edgedemon

edgedemon

Soldato
Joined
10 Oct 2005
Posts
4,192
Location
London
I know this is a very old argument but after getting a Sony a6000 as they were too cheap to resist, Im actually a convert.

Do I prefer an OVF- yes, I probably still do, but since getting the a6000, there are certain benefits that I hadn't realised (this isn't a sony fanboy post, it would apply to all EVF's)
I have found that the sheer amount of photo's I take has increased, partly because the fun has come back into my photography. Im a Pentax guy, and I have a massive collection of old manual glass, and the a6000 has brought the fun back to the lenses as with the focus assist, even F1.2 glass is so easy to focus now and know you will nail the shot.
I find myself just picking a lens and going out to see what I can get with it, and although (especially in the dark) an EVF is a challenge, overall the experience is really positive and Im a big fan now..

Just thought I'd throw my tuppence worth in..
 
I think what I like about EVF is accuracy of EVF as you are seeing what the sensor is actually seeing.... not what purely the optics is seeing. Big difference ....especially when setting exposure compensation for example

Maybe I'm wrong, but that's what I see it as...
 
Not strictly true, at least for some evfs.
The add on one for my Olympus E-Pl5 for example has a menu for brightness settings, so can be considerably different to the actual image taken if not set properly.
 
They both have benefits but the issues with EVF at the moment outweigh OVF.

It kills batteries, has issues in high contrast scenes as well as in the evening, basically making it worse for what I shoot most, travel and landscape.
 
Depends on the shooter. Most pros I'm sure would prefer an OVF, whilst hobbyists wouldn't notice or be bothered by the issues with an EVF and would appreciate the benefits.
 
EVF for me, wouldnt go back to an OVF. Only thing i noticed was lag, but doing landscapes it doesnt matter, much prefer having, focus peaking and live view. I havent found any issues using it in the dark either.
 
Last edited:
I enjoy using both to be honest. The EVF on my Sony A6000 is pretty good but struggles in low light. The OVF on my Nikon D750 is lovely and big and superb for low light shots.

I'd say its easier to take consistent shots with an EVF because you're getting a good idea of your exposure, but if you're a competent photographer its not going to matter much.
 
EVF is not there yet unfortunately, at least not in the Cameras I have tested.
Lag, noise, low dynamic range, kills batteries, eyestrain. On cheaper cameras they are really small and low res, the higher end camera have better size and resolution but it still doesn't feel at all natural. The worst is if you shoot a high contrast scene then the highlights and shadows get completely clipped making it hard to work out a good exposure and EC value. In low lights EVFs just become unworkable IMO.

I am also constantly hearing stories of people that tried soemthign like an A7S as a wedding camera and promptly had to return it because it made them feel nauseous of gave them headaches.




Saying that the new Lecia 601 supposedly has a viewfinder that makes the best Sony/Olympus/Fuji viewfinders look like cheap toys. 4.4Mp and larger colour gamut. Hope to be able to try it on my future travels. With any luck that is the kind of EVF that will find its way into the forthcoming Canon and nikon mirrorless camera.



EVF will be able to have some benefits over OVF but only if the basic image quality and user feedback is indistinguishable.
 
EVF for me every time.

I don't buy the line about it making it hard to work out good exposure or EC value though. I don't see how that part is any different.

Perhaps for pros, like DP mentioned it's not quite there just yet.
 
The problem is the EVF has a limited dynamic range so if you are viewing a high contrast scene like a landscape then the EVf doesn't display the scene properly without clipping highlights and loosing shadows to mush. With an OVF you get everything, especially no highlight clipping. that make it much easier to work out exposures.
 
D.P. said:
The problem is the EVF has a limited dynamic range so if you are viewing a high contrast scene like a landscape then the EVf doesn't display the scene properly without clipping highlights and loosing shadows to mush. With an OVF you get everything, especially no highlight clipping. that make it much easier to work out exposures.
Click to expand...

But that's what Zebra, or the live histogram is for. I expose so its just on or under 100 for highlights and the shadows are easily recovered in post.

I really dont understand this low light stuff as well, i have used my camera in the total dark and the evf just gains up with my 40D i couldnt see a thing.
 
Last edited:
The problem with the EVF is is doesn't show what the true light is actual like, depending on the model you use it either shows you what it thinks exposure should be, or it shows you your currently selected exposure settings are. However, I want to see what the actual real world is, the natural light without any kind of highlight clipping, or exposure adjustment, and make a mental decision on any required exposure compensation.

When you say your EVF gains up, that is exactly the problem with EVFs!
 
One of the things I like about the Fuji X100 series is that you have both EVF and OVF and can switch between them with a little lever.

The advantage with OVF is that the camera is ready to go a lot quicker than using the EVF and uses less battery power, it also works great in really bright sunlight and you are seeing through the lens what your eye is seeing, it's more purest.

The advantage of the EVF is that you see more or less how the shot is going to end up and it's also framed better than the OVF, which is slight off the lens, although it does have frame markings.

I find myself switching between them depending on the shooting circumstances, so it's nice to have that ability.
 
Horses for courses..

I absolutely love it on my Sony A77, full frame size view finder on an APS-C DSLR, with focus peaking and ability to see the shot before you take it is just something I enjoy and keeps me using it..

I also love the rear LCD which on the A77 still employs PDAF so it's just as quick to use as looking through the viewfinder, so I often find myself using it for really low or really high shots since it's 3 way articulated..

I've found no issues in low light, it's brighter for me than I can see with the naked eye, and you can always turn off the feature that shows the correct exposure so you can use it more like a fixed OVF if you so wish (and have to for studio work).
 
D.P. said:
The problem with the EVF is is doesn't show what the true light is actual like, depending on the model you use it either shows you what it thinks exposure should be, or it shows you your currently selected exposure settings are. However, I want to see what the actual real world is, the natural light without any kind of highlight clipping, or exposure adjustment, and make a mental decision on any required exposure compensation.

When you say your EVF gains up, that is exactly the problem with EVFs!
Click to expand...

Turn it off then. Then you can see what the actual real world light conditions are.
 
robj20 said:
But that's what Zebra, or the live histogram is for. I expose so its just on or under 100 for highlights and the shadows are easily recovered in post.

I really dont understand this low light stuff as well, i have used my camera in the total dark and the evf just gains up with my 40D i couldnt see a thing.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I find Zebra peaking to be a wonderful feature for EVF if supported.
 
Given the choice, EVF every day of the week for me. My X-E2 doesn't lag in any situation where I wouldn't choose to use a tripod anyway. I love the ability to see exactly what the shot will look like, surrounded by all the information I need to make a choice. And it's the shot that I'm doing this for after all, not what a subject looks like in real life. And that's before I even consider focus peaking for MF lenses and other benefits.

With an EVF I've found that my shot count has gone down massively, and my keeper count up massively.
 
D.P. said:
The problem is the EVF has a limited dynamic range so if you are viewing a high contrast scene like a landscape then the EVf doesn't display the scene properly without clipping highlights and loosing shadows to mush. With an OVF you get everything, especially no highlight clipping. that make it much easier to work out exposures.
Click to expand...

I understand that, but with an OVF you're just using the dynamic range of your eye. In a landscape scene nothing stops you from dong that with an EVF i.e. just lifting you head and looking with your eye.

But anyway, for the most part I agree with you.
 
robj20 said:
Turn it off then. Then you can see what the actual real world light conditions are.
Click to expand...

But you don't, because the camera is still making a decision on exposure to present to you and is displaying on a screen with less dynamic range, less color depth and less resolution than through an OVF.



Don't get me wrong, EVFs do have a lot of advantages like focus peaking and real time histograms, but they still haven't equalled the quality of an OVF yet. Eventually the technology will catch up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom