Optical viewfinder vs Electronic viewfinder experiences

[carbon]

Hi everyone, first post here. I got into photography with a FM2, and then an 8008s. Went Canon in the mid-90s because of AF and sort of dropped out of photography in the mid-2000’s (never went digital).

So I’m back in the hobby and got myself a D6 and a 1Dx III, apparently right as DSLRs are going obsolete. Great timing!

Looking at doing some BIF photography. Anyway…enough about me.

I am wondering how people transitioned from OVF to EVF. Before I bought a DSLR I briefly checked out either a Sony A1 or one step down at Best Buy (of all places) and it was ok. Best EVF that I had seen, but I hadn’t seen many, and I didn’t really like it. This was about a year ago.

Fast forward to last week and I had a chance to peer through a Z9. Yeesh! All flickery. No idea about the Canon R3. But it doesn’t matter the brand, you’re still looking at a tiny TV monitor.

I get the advantages of an EVF with looking at exposure right through the viewfinder, no blackout, higher fps, silent, etc. etc but man, I stare at a computer screen all day long.

Looking at real life through an OVF just gets the hair standing up on the back of my neck and puts me in the moment.

And my Leica M10-P places me even closer into whatever “scene” I’m in. Rangefinder manual focusing is the bomb.

I don’t plan on ever making a dime at this and the actual images are sorta secondary to me being in some sort of zen trance lol. I also occasionally shoot at night (not birds, obv) and don’t know if EVFs mess one’s adaptive night vision up.

In short, EVFs make me feel like I’m using a camcorder and making a crappy (but funny) home movie with my high-school buddies. Not like I ever did that

To be clear, I’m not asking about the results (photos) or how you feel about them. And of course I want sharp pics. But I’m not sure at what cost to the overall experience?

I’m asking about how the OVF/EVF adds to/subtracts from the experience while you actually take the shot (and very soon after).

How have you (or haven’t you) made the OVF/EVF transition?

P.S. Heck, I could ask this same sort of question about AF vs MF. Manual focusing an old Nikkor during a football game is a sublime experience when you do it right.

 

[bleirer]

Something was wrong if the z9 was flickery. For the higher end cameras an EVF looks pretty similar to looking through an optical viewfinder except usually it is simulating the exposure, though that can be switched off.

I think the evf is tenfold better than the ovf.

 

[BlackRockArt]

That sounds odd. AFAIK, Sony A1, Nikon Z9, Canon R3 all have great EVF without "flicky" feeling, the Electronic View Finder has come a long way during the last 8 years; with high refresh rate, vast information display, the EVF has long passed OVF.

I can not imaging ever going back to OVF again, not just for wild life photography, also for portrait, landscape, wide field astro photography, macro, etc. Even for street photography, the EVF is far more convenient.

Oliver

 

[Replytoken]

Both have their advantages and disadvantages. You should use what you want/need. I have bodies with both VF's and have come to appreciate them and I adjust as needed.

--Ken

 

[Chris K]

The Z9 has a 60Hz refresh rate, with the option for 120Hz refresh rate. If a 120Hz refresh rate is a flickery mess for you, you're in a vanishingly-small part of the population, and you have my condolences. Televisions, laptop screens, and anything in a car refresh at 60Hz or less... do they also look flickery?

In any case, I find EVFs to be a panacea. Only my GH1 (an LCOS display) was slow enough for me to suffer artifacts (rainbow artifacts when moving my eye around). Every other camera has been great, except for the odd frame rate issue in extremely low light. And the benefits of WYWIWYG, focus blinkies, live histograms, and all the rest are a huge benefit.

Night vision hasn't been an issue for me for my current EVF cameras, as they all have auto-brightness adjustments.

I use the OVF on my XPro2 and X100V sometimes, but more just to do something different from time-to-time.

 

[JamesFarrell]

The Z9 has a 60Hz refresh rate, with the option for 120Hz refresh rate. If a 120Hz refresh rate is a flickery mess for you, you're in a vanishingly-small part of the population, and you have my condolences. Televisions, laptop screens, and anything in a car refresh at 60Hz or less... do they also look flickery?

In any case, I find EVFs to be a panacea. Only my GH1 (an LCOS display) was slow enough for me to suffer artifacts (rainbow artifacts when moving my eye around). Every other camera has been great, except for the odd frame rate issue in extremely low light. And the benefits of WYWIWYG, focus blinkies, live histograms, and all the rest are a huge benefit ....

Agree Chris: I wonder if the original poster was looking though the Z9 viewfinder and a lens with the lens cap being sensor noise on OR was looking through the Z9 at a TV or some other monitor for which he would likely see some flickering. Whatever.

 

[Steve]

Welcome to the forums

For me, no issues at all using EVFs. With the a1, I sometimes forget I'm using one and the Z9 is pretty close to that as well. However, in dim light things can start to look a bit more screen-like - however, an optical VF is tough in the dark too. I'd give it another chance for sure.

Still, nothing wrong with sticking with DSLRs if you prefer the optical VF experience. It's good to have choices.

 

[carbon]

I’m really getting at a metaphysical question here. Set aside my weird Z9 experience…

I’m looking for internal experiences, not a diagnosing of a technical sort.

I mean, I didn’t like the Sony A1 or A7xxx viewfinder either (whichever I looked through). An electronic viewfinder isn’t the actual scene, and it’s not like looking at real life. It’s a simulation of sorts.

It’s sort of like looking at a TV in the woods. How does that sit with your soul and how did/does it affect your experience behind the camera and in the wild?

I go outside in part to not look a screens (or to at least greatly reduce my screen time).

Edit: it’s like this—a machine can simultaneously improve the output and reduce the user’s satisfaction of the process. Re: AF vs MF. Something gained, something lost.

Imagine a picture-taking robot you send to the woods to take mind-blowing pics of owls whilst you sip White Russians at the bowling alley. Hmmm…for me, no thanks, I’m not about just for the end result.

It’s quite ok to me if it improved your life. Tell me why, either way. Dwell on it for a bit.

 

[Barbara]

An OVF gives you an image also, not the same as looking with the unaided eyes.

 

[MotoPixel]

I’m really getting at a metaphysical question here. Set aside my weird Z9 experience…

I’m looking for internal experiences, not a diagnosing of a technical sort.

I mean, I didn’t like the Sony A1 or A7xxx viewfinder either (whichever I looked through). An electronic viewfinder isn’t the actual scene, and it’s not like looking at real life. It’s a simulation of sorts.

It’s sort of like looking at a TV in the woods. How does that sit with your soul and how did/does it affect your experience behind the camera and in the wild?

I go outside in part to not look a screens (or to at least greatly reduce my screen time).

Edit: it’s like this—a machine can simultaneously improve the output and reduce the user’s satisfaction of the process. Re: AF vs MF. Something gained, something lost.

Imagine a picture-taking robot you send to the woods to take mind-blowing pics of owls whilst you sip White Russians at the bowling alley. Hmmm…for me, no thanks, I’m not about just for the end result.

It’s quite ok to me if it improved your life. Tell me why, either way. Dwell on it for a bit.

I've owned a Z9 for well on a year now and I have zero desire to go back to an OVF...and I came from D850 and D500 prior to the Z9. What tradeoffs an EVF does have, at least in the case of the Z9, are, for me, hugely outweighed by its advantages. Prior models, I would never have said that about. I can't speak to Sony or Canon or any others, I've never considered them and have no reason to.

As for the metaphysical aspects you allude to, when I'm out taking photos, I'm taking photos, I want to use the best tool, for me, to give me the best chance of capturing what's in my mind's eye. If I want to have a metaphysical experience I put the camera down and I don't spend time looking through a lens and viewfinder, optical or electronic. I can relate it to being at a sporting event or concert taking photos...you have blinders on and can miss so much of the overall experience.

Seems to me you're predisposed to not liking the "idea" of an EVF...that bias pervades what you wrote on many levels. That's fine, we all have our own perspectives and biases when it comes to this hobby/craft/art...that's what drives our decisions and our aesthetic.

Cheers!

 

[Replytoken]

When I use an EVF, I see it as a miniature of what I am hoping to capture as my final image, and possibly a print. I cannot say the same for an OVF, which lets me see what my eye sees and not necessarily what the camera sensor sees. That does not mean that I would not use a camera with an OVF, but I find I am closer to the final product during the process with an EVF.

--Ken

 

[MrFotoFool]

Of the replies so far, it seems I am the only one who will agree with you. I prefer an optical viewfinder which is why I own two D850's and four F mount lenses as my primary tools. I did get a Sony A74 just over a year ago for the sole purpose of using their stellar 200-600 lens. More on that in a bit.

I have had two opportunities to briefly try a Canon R5 and the viewfinder was hideous - to the point of being unuseable. I rented the Sony A74 before I bought one and it is better. I also recently rented a Sony A7r5 which is marginally better still, but not as much as the three times higher resolution viewfinder would indicate. Most recently I rented a Nikon Z7ii (with 400 f4.5) and it had an even nicer electronic viewfinder (but had other issues which make me not want one). I only briefly looked through a Nikon Z9 but that was in the dark at a building so I can't say what it's like during normal use though it is reported to be the most SLR-like view.

Canon R3 and I think their new R6ii has an option called OVF simulation (or something like that) which apparently is very close to an optical viewfinder, particularly on the R3. However in that mode you lose the ability to see what the exposure actually looks like, which is perhaps the main advantage of an electronic viewfinder. The other advantage is shooting the full sun without risking eye damage, as you would in an SLR. Below is a sample of that with my Sony from a few days ago.

Bottom line - enjoy your SLR's and grab some discounted lenses when people offload them for mirrorless. My experience (as someone who lives in a sunny desert) is that electronic viewfinders look best in soft overcast or low light (after sun goes behind the hill and I am in open shade). In bright sunlight the optical viewfinder looks better. However the Sony is growing on me and with their lens selection I may slowly start migrating systems (as money allows, which will be slowly).

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Krümelkraft]

Short answer:
I was thinking exactly like you. I still do but I got used to the EVF.
I also think that looking through an OVF is being more intimate with the wildlife, however, I also think that the picture I take won't look like the OVF image anyway.
At the end, what we carry home is an image that appears on a screen or on a print anyway.

 

[fcotterill]

Welcome to BCG.

On the question of taking technology into the outdoors to image wildlife, where does one draw a line? A year after the mechanical FM2 launched (with its nifty LED lightmeter readout bordering the OVF), Nikon released the award winning FA, which was unaffordable to many of us back in 1983; one factor for its higher price was its Automatic Multimetering System. A world first, this computed the exposure from 5 subsectors of the OVF. Within 2 decades, the core functions of almost all ILCs had become thoroughly computerized; obviously, microelectronics defines the sine qua none of every DSLR. MILCs have replaced the OVF with a EVF, which matured in resolution around 2018.

Each stage has had its critics, including of the F3 that replaced the F2: with - horrors of horrors - digital control of the mechanical shutter. Many superb wildlife images are being captured with remote setups, on DSLRs and MILCs. Their immense value to conservation photography is growing. These systems are also reliant on electronics, often including flash (that have been used in wildlife photography for decades).

I never found the Z7 EVF unnatural, besides the blackout at its high frame rate. The Z9 EVF is even more natural than any OVF in my experience. I enjoy how one's view is not broken as the frames are being captured (at 20fps and higher). This is in addition to all the other benefits - mentioned above for the EVF.

My D6 and D850 continue work as reliably as always, interchangeably with the Z9.

 

[Nanakamado]

I have only a brief oportunity to look trough Z9 EVF, but for me it looks amazing. Never expected that EVF will go so far, when using it with old compacts.
But if You like OVF and general DSLR feeling maybe You should go with Pentax, they are still making new DSLRs and they will be probably as long as old guards manages Ricoh.

I have to add that I really don't get this AF/MF comparison. First time with AF was like revelation to me. I really hated it when I was learning to shoot with my analog SLR and only some time later I knew that I made bunch of out of focus crap.

And in case of metaphysical aspect I mostly agree with @MotoPixel it happens when I put the camera down or don't have it with me. For a state of flow, that I feel when shooting photos, it does not matter what gear I use as long as gear is helping and not going in the way of capturing great images.

 

[EricBowles]

I’m really getting at a metaphysical question here. Set aside my weird Z9 experience…

I’m looking for internal experiences, not a diagnosing of a technical sort.

I mean, I didn’t like the Sony A1 or A7xxx viewfinder either (whichever I looked through). An electronic viewfinder isn’t the actual scene, and it’s not like looking at real life. It’s a simulation of sorts.

It’s sort of like looking at a TV in the woods. How does that sit with your soul and how did/does it affect your experience behind the camera and in the wild?

I go outside in part to not look a screens (or to at least greatly reduce my screen time).

Edit: it’s like this—a machine can simultaneously improve the output and reduce the user’s satisfaction of the process. Re: AF vs MF. Something gained, something lost.

Imagine a picture-taking robot you send to the woods to take mind-blowing pics of owls whilst you sip White Russians at the bowling alley. Hmmm…for me, no thanks, I’m not about just for the end result.

It’s quite ok to me if it improved your life. Tell me why, either way. Dwell on it for a bit.

I actually like the EVF - and have since my initial Z6 camera. I liked it pretty well with the earlier Nikon V1 - certainly enough to use it. With the Z6, I felt it was a major strength of the mirrorless system.

As far as the experience, when I'm using a D850 side by side with a Z6 or Z7ii, it seems antiquated in comparison - as though I've gone back to manual focus or film. The viewfinder has less information and no connection with the image I will produce. Manual focus is much more difficult. And I have to stop and put on glasses to use the rear LCD for playback on a DSLR.

Everyone has their own preferences, but for me, it's a big improvement over an OVF.

 

[DRM]

I did not like the EVF at first either. I did not like the computer/TV rendition vs the real life OVF view. It seemed fake, contrived, unnatural, etc. But I had read so many comments about people getting used to it and then actually preferring it to the OVF that I stayed with it and gave it a chance. I also tweaked the default settings, adjusting the diopter, white balance, contrast, etc. to match the EVF to what I saw with my eye when looking around. I’ve only owned two mirrorless cameras, but with each I needed to tweak the default settings to make the EVF the best it could be. Tweaking the settings made a big difference for me. Things looked more natural.

As far as the Z9, I have seen a flicker as well. If I recall it happens when I first put my eye to the EVF and immediately start moving the camera around. I personally think the camera’s sensor is debating whether the rear LCD or the EVF should get the feed, perhaps because the eye isn’t locked in position quite yet but can still see the image.

Oh, and like the others I referred to, I came around and now welcome the benefits of the EVF. The real time exposure, the ability to zoom your image in to 100% and 200%, and the ability to “artificially” lighten the EVF image in near complete darkness to see what you are shooting is amazing. Love it.

 

[MotoPixel]

snip...

As far as the Z9, I have seen a flicker as well. If I recall it happens when I first put my eye to the EVF and immediately start moving the camera around. I personally think the camera’s sensor is debating whether the rear LCD or the EVF should get the feed, perhaps because the eye isn’t locked in position quite yet but can still see the image.

snip...

I see the same thing, occasionally, only for a second or two in the same situation you mention. Haven't explored it enough to determine if there are specific, repeatable conditions that trigger that behavior. I don't know if it happens more or less if I run the refresh at 120Hz as I never run the viewfinder in that mode.

 

[bleirer]

One thing I like is being able to customize the display of the evf. I keep one screen nothing but exposure info on the bottom and the size/position of the focus area. A touch of the info button to add the 3 color histogram and another touch to see everything. One more touch back to the mostly empty screen.

I like to have a brief review screen of the last photo appear in the evf, to check blinkies (some cameras can show blinkies all the time, not just on review) . The review only appears when I release the focus button so it doesnt interfere with shooting bursts. It disappears with another press of of the focus button.

 

[Darrellhar]

I was honestly in the same boat as you and thought that I would never enjoy shooting with an EVF. It just didn't seem natural to me. Last year I took a leap of faith and ordered a Z9, even after owning a Z6 and still to this day don't like shooting with it. For me personally I enjoyed the Z9 so much that I sold my D850, that I absolutely loved. Everyone obviously has to make their own decisions on what works best for them. I would suggest giving Z9 or A1 or one of the other newer models a chance again if you can. It might be the way the ones you used were set up that caused the flicker. As a few have mentioned here I too have not run into that issue and that was before turning EVF up to 120hz. I've never used them but I've heard the Sony EVF's are also very good. As Steve mentioned above there is absolutely nothing wrong with still shooting with a DSLR. As I'm sure we all know the writing is on the wall and Mirrorless is the future oh photography. That is part of the reason I made the leap. I have a lot of shooting years left and figured it was time. I honestly have no regrets and hope that you get to the point where you can say the same. No matter what direction you go in.

 

[carbon]

As far as the Z9, I have seen a flicker as well. If I recall it happens when I first put my eye to the EVF and immediately start moving the camera around.

This is exactly the scenario in which I saw the flicker. Picked it up, moved it around, grossed out, put it back down and moved on lol.

Nice to hear how people felt and thought about their OVF/EVF.

For me, the zen flow doesn’t start after I set the camera down; rather, it starts when I pick the camera up and often ends once I stop shooting.

Thanks for the discussion…a thoughtful discussion and sharing of experiences is what I was after. Carry on.

 

[dupcak]

I look at it as another tool to achieve what I want. Personally I still like the experience of looking through my D500 OVF - something about it just feels natural. However, as far as using the camera to take photos, I 100% prefer my Z9 and it's EVF. I do a lot of theatre photography and the EVF means I don't screw up exposure with really hot spotlights or forget to adjust exposure compensation in random situations. So while the EVF doesn't seem quite as natural, it's a tool I really have a hard time living without.

Back in December I did two days of gorilla treks in Uganda. The first day I took my D500 and my Z9. The second day I just took the Z9 since it made capturing the photos that much easier.

 

[Viathelens]

My Z9 does not flicker. I must be missing something because I never skipped a beat moving from a dSLR to a mirrorless, I just don't see any difference. I always take two cameras and I move back and forth from a dSLR to the mirrorless and it works fine, no problem at all, it all feels natural.

 

[ssheipel]

I shoot with the D6 and Z9 and except when trying to review shots in the EVF on the D6 (urp) I really don't notice the difference using one or the other as a viewfinder. Of course wysiwyg exposure changes in the EVF are very handy, but again in terms 'looking through' the viewfinder to take shots, for me no difference. FYI, my Z9 EVF has on a very rare occasion (say less than half a dozen times) behaved like a low res, slowed down motion video but it almost instantly went away or did so if with an on off of the camera. I always assumed it was my selecting something wrong to produce that. Given my Z9 is in the shop for LCD issues, could be a glitch (and certainly the two 'issues' could be related of course since LCD and EVF are receiving the same signals...).

 

[John Navitsky]

was it set to a slow shutter speed? that can influence the evf.

in general the evf experience with stacked sensor cameras like the z9, a1, r3 should all be very good. keep in mind the have tunable settings that can impact your experience. the z9 can be 60 or 120fps. i didn’t mind 60, but 120 is better.

if it was set to 120fps and you were not set to a slow shutter speed then you probably are not going to get along with any evf because although each may have slightly different characteristics, they’re all of similar characteristics.

personally i love the evf of the z9 and i liked the a1 as well.