I use the OVF of my 1000D, 40D and 7D without feeling awkwardness... then I use the live view on my EPL1 without any difficulty or wishing for an OVF, later I got myself a EVF to put on my EPL1 and still feel right at home. And now my OM-D came with its own EVF and I like it too.
So the point here is... if you limit yourself to one technology and thats it... then you are missing out on lots of fun on alot of things.
Last edited by rhino123; 5th June 2012 at 03:00 PM.
My question was if given a choice between an EVF or an OVF, would you pick the EVF? Generally speaking since X100 may be an exception.
Edit: for the record, I would gladly swap out the NEx-7's 2 million dot EVF for a basic OVF if I could because at the end of the day, it's just not the same.
And mind you, I'm an A900 user, which has one of the best OFVs ever put in a DSLR. But I can tell you there are some huge advantages to a good EVF.
And remember, even "OVF" is relative. If it's those small little pentamirror boxes entry-level DSLRs give you, almost any EVF will be better.
Last edited by Rashkae; 5th June 2012 at 03:05 PM.
And you still get the "what the sensor will see" benefit as compared to "what the lens sees".
It's down to personal preference at the end of the day.
I personally feel more eye strain with an evf as I wear specs, so prefer ovf. Maybe I haven't tried out the best evfs out there. There's no reason to get heated up about personal preferences. To each his own.
Well, many other people are quite impressed with the EVF and it's benefits after using it for a while. But it's all a subjective thing.
Then again, once Canon and Nikon drop the 1940s-era OVF technology and switch to EVFs, people will be praising it all of a sudden. :P
i don't have a specific preference. i use both OVF and EVF, or any system i can get my hands on. whatever suits my purposes and can do the job will be my pick.
and i use the NEX-7 and A850. i've also used the 5D, the 1D, the D4, the D3s, the X100, Leica etc
in the end, i pick the camera to use based on the situation.
each of the technologies have their own pros and cons. and in the end, the camera is the tool you use to meet your wants (the image) is it not? so why fuss over what to use?
the only losers i see are the ones who champion one technology over the other and are not open to new ideas.
M43 is getting popular nowadays. I own a Nikon system including the trinity lens. But ever since I bought a lumix g system for my last holiday trip, I realize I have been using m43 system more often. When you not young anymore and like to walk a lot to take photo, weight does matters. If you view the photo on 13 inch screen or do normal print, I think you need to look harder to see the difference.
You can choose either M43 or entry level DSLR, sony NEX is not suitable as the lack of suitable lens. DSLR will cost less compared to M43 with regard to the same lever image quality; there are more cheap lens to choose for DLSR. There actually have quite a few of small size DSLR such as the new nikon D3200 and a serious of pentax camera. However M43 is certainly much more smaller
and what "same level of IQ" between DSLR and Micro 4/3s? and FYI, Nikon and Pentax aren't the ones with small DSLRs. Sony's SLT A33, A35 and A55 are the smallest of the lot. why don't you go read up more before coming in to say that a series of cameras aren't suitable for learning photography
Mirrorless is the future of cameras. The end of big DSLRs is near.
For me, the best is choice the Sony NEX system. It is small but the image quality is not compromised. I had an SLR before (canon 60D) but never missed it when I got my 5N.