07-01-2011, 11:05 AM
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1309514134' post='9682']
Actually ... I do.
What exactly do you consider to be "better" in a mirror viewfinder ? I mean objectively. Not subjectively.
Subjectively it feels nicer, of course.
[/quote]
That it feels nicer, already is objectively better.
How it handles more extreme lighting conditions is also objectively better..
EVFs still blow all detail out of bright areas like cloudy skies, and also detail on dark areas. They also tend to put a lot of distracting info and symbols over the image, instead of on the side or bottom of the image, like OVFs do.
And OVFs give a 3D feel, you look into the scene, helping me, at least, to judge my weird and shallow DOF nature images. EVFs and LCDs do not do that, they have a very "flat projection" 2D feel, in comparison.
That is quite a list, I think, in what OVFs actually "do better".
Actually ... I do.
What exactly do you consider to be "better" in a mirror viewfinder ? I mean objectively. Not subjectively.
Subjectively it feels nicer, of course.
[/quote]
That it feels nicer, already is objectively better.
How it handles more extreme lighting conditions is also objectively better..
EVFs still blow all detail out of bright areas like cloudy skies, and also detail on dark areas. They also tend to put a lot of distracting info and symbols over the image, instead of on the side or bottom of the image, like OVFs do.
And OVFs give a 3D feel, you look into the scene, helping me, at least, to judge my weird and shallow DOF nature images. EVFs and LCDs do not do that, they have a very "flat projection" 2D feel, in comparison.
That is quite a list, I think, in what OVFs actually "do better".