Takeshita K wrote: > > Not wishing to stir up any controversy, but above begs another question. > I wonder what other folks think about EVF which will eliminate the > mirror box, and give lens designers a tremendous freedom in designing > SLR lenses, particularly wider angle ones. It will also eliminate > the "ugly" gables from the top of traditional SLRs, giving all sorts > of freedom in body design too. > Yes, I understand all the arguments that the optical view finder is > the essence of SLR and so forth (SLRs are often judged by their > viewfinder performance). > However, I once peeped through an EVF of one of the K/M models > (DiMage A2 or A200 or some such) and was surprised to find how clear > the image was (I know the poor EVF's of many P&S digicams which are > only useful for the composition). > But if the resolution is at least 1mp and the refresh rate is fast > enough, I would be very interested in it. It can be a 100% view area, > brighter (it could even be illuminated under certain conditions), and > give all sorts of creative options such as instant magnification > etc. Most of all, it is going to give a live view in SLRs. > > Maybe Pentax might be the first one to adopt a superior EVF for > K1D ;-). Then again, they are still too conservative in adopting too > radical a feature as a pioneer, unlike their past. > > Ken >
Ugh, I've tried EVF's. Even good ones. or supposedly good ones. While I can see the utility of a camera like the DSC-R1, using the LCD as a waistlevel and such when working slowly, EVF's are laggy, difficult to use in manual focus or confirming focus, have large issues in low light (as they are dependant on the sensor's high ISO performance) and low resolution, not to mention the DoF preview issues with them. I won't buy an EVF camera. Especially if it's claiming to be an SLR. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
