Everytime a new camera gets announced you will hear people complaining about the lack of built in OVF and if a camera has an EVF instead you will hear people still complaining that an EVF can't match the quality of an OVF.
While I think an LCD is superior to both and less conspicious for street photography I do want to share my views on the OVF vs. EVF debate.
First I think no compact camera should have an OVF or EVF integrated since it either makes the camera bigger and so defines the point of a compact camera (see Canon G10), means the OVF is dark, tiny and obstructed by the lens (Nikon P6000, any Canon Ixus) or both (Canon G10 is a perfect example). The OVF on compact cameras also does not show you any shooting information so is basically a hole through the camra and thus pointless. Now having an integrated EVF could be better but since there is no really compact camera with an EVF available it must mean it's not that easy to do, besides why have an EVF if you have a nice and big 3.0" LCD screen on a compact camera.
So it basically comes to this, any new compact camera should scrap the integrated OVF or EVF and instead offer both as external add-ons like on the Ricoh GRD or GX200 for example. This way you can have a high quality OVF although without shooting information or a good EVF if you need it and are prepared to live with a bigger camera. Only with external OVF/EVF add-ons can you get the quality needed to make this usefull and not just be a hole through the camera.
Having an add-on option is good but what should it be, an OVF or rather an EVF?
The OVF has the advantage that it does not consume any power, will not have any lag, can be very bright (like the GV-1 OVF in the picture) and is good for low light. The downsides is that it won't show any shooting information, will have paralax errors and you still have to use the LCD to change any settings.
The EVF on the other hand will show you exactly what the camera sees with the full shooting information from the LCD, you can have a live histogram, see the scene in b&w and it will reflect any changes you make to the shooting parameters like the white balance. You can tilt it 90° (like the VF-1), simulate the shutter speed and depth of field effect (like the Panasonic G1), zoom into a section of your picture to help with the manual focus and even shoot into the sun without having to wory about your eyes. The downside is that it consumes power, it can have a serious lag (like the Panasonic LC1 EVF) and can become very dark or slow and grainy in low light rendering it useless.
Overall, for me a EVF is way superior to an OVF due to the flexibility it offers. Being able to see a scene in b&w is great for street photography where you want to capture the right moment and emotions without being distracted by the color in a scene. Another thing I find very usefull is to see the full shooting information at all times and see the changes to te white balance and exposure reflected on screen. An OVF can be nice and bright and better in low light but considering that one only really needs an OVF to frame a shot it is a bit pointless since this can be done faster and easier by looking at the screen to frame and afterwards at the scene to take the picture.
What I would like to see in the upcoming cameras from Ricoh is a refined version of the VF-1, that is bigger, faster and has a higher resolution. The option to tilt it in more directions would also be nice to have. Although I would prefer if the EVF could sit like on the Panasonic LC1 on the side of the camera and not in the middle.
EVF has further advantage; no parallax.
ReplyDeleteI much prefer to use LCD on compact cameras unless stealth or visibility dictate other wise.
Oh, also on zoom lenses, EVF means there is no need to have a zoom finder!
Sweet!
The Ricoh EVF is good but the reality is that I hardly ever use it.
ReplyDeleteI agree OVF are a waste of space in compacts - never use the one on my G9.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, having recently acquired a Nikon D40 DSLR which does not have live view, I now appreciate the advantages (in most instances) of a OVF over a LCD - you have a more intimate feel for the shot you are composing (paradoxically there is no camera between you and the subject)
After nearly 5 years of digital photography I still can't fully appreciate using the LCD screen. I prefer an OVF, but hate it as an add-on because they charge so much more for it.
ReplyDeleteLili, you are right with the paralax and for zom lenses a EVF will be much better.
ReplyDeleteMarco, I really like the EVF on the GX200 but only use it when I have the 19mm lens attached. It makes it look more like a mini dSLR then and the camera is easier to hold with the adapter lens and EVF. I find that I only use the OVF on the GRD when I have any add-on lenses attached. Without add-on lenses I don't like using any external finder since it makes the camera too big.
Yesbuts, I agree that the OVF in the Canon G series is a big waste of space. But I also don't think the D40 OVF is very good, mostly I find it too dark, especially when you compare it with the Ricoh external OVF or the Epson RD1 OVF.
Wouter, I agree that external OVFs are too expensive on their own and should be bundled with the camera. I guess for film shooters would miss an OVF more than people, like me, who got into photography using digital compact cameras.
I only use an OVF or EVF if the camera is big and bulky or had a lens sticking out where I can hold it so for compacts, like the GR1, I can't get used to an OVF.
What about takin snaps under the bright sun? Isn´t it better to watch the scene through the OVF ? The LCD is not readable, even if you had it in power mode or if you shade it with one hand...
ReplyDeleteI have used variuos cameras under difficult light conditions and never had any problem to see enough of the LCD in order to compose the shot. An EVF however will give you the advantages of both the OVF and LCD.
ReplyDeleteDon't forget how you hold the camera with OVF and EVF. Which one will give you steadier hand hold?
ReplyDeleteGG2, for me holding the camera and using te LCD is actually steadier than pressing it against my face. I have used more cameras with LCD than with OVF so have more práctice with using a LCD.
ReplyDelete