Bill Livingston Posted January 8, 2016 Share #21 Posted January 8, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) The results are a factor of the lens, the sensor and the way the files are handled by the camera... and the choices made in focus, iso, aperture and shutter speed... nothing in the viewfinder, whether optical or EVF, has anything directly to do with the results. It isn't in the light path being recorded, so how can it be? The results are not at all just 'pixels, the same as any other camera'. That's no different to saying that you get the same results on any film type, regardless of the camera, lens, etc... Experience of looking through an OVF? I can understand that the viewfinder can be important element if the point of using any particular camera is purely for the experience of using it and the pleasure gained by that experience, but let's not kid ourselves, a viewfinder has no direct bearing, either positive or negative, as far as the quality of the image is concerned. Dont get me wrong, I enjoy using my M every bit as much as anyone else, but it is the whole experience of using it that I enjoy... and the images I produce today are significantly more rewarding than on any other camera I have used over the past fifty (!) years... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 8, 2016 Posted January 8, 2016 Hi Bill Livingston, Take a look here Leica EVF2 Replacement Coming?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pop Posted January 8, 2016 Share #22 Posted January 8, 2016 (...)... nothing in the viewfinder, whether optical or EVF, has anything directly to do with the results. It isn't in the light path being recorded, so how can it be? (...) The simplest case: if what you see in the EVF lies in the past, you will be late releasing the shutter. If the EVF does not reproduce the scene in front of the camera faithfully enough, you might not interpret what you quite correctly. To remain within your way of expressing it: the EVF lies within the path of control: from subject through the finder to the photographer's brain to his hands to the camera to the image. There are better and worse pianos. One of the main differences lies in the mechanism of the keys. A Renner-Mechanik will enable the pianist to rapidly repeat the same note. Otherwise the mechanism has scarcely an influence on the actual sound of the piano; well, it could generate spurious sounds if the hammer was not properly guided. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted January 8, 2016 Share #23 Posted January 8, 2016 To remain within your way of expressing it: the EVF lies within the path of control: from subject through the finder to the photographer's brain to his hands to the camera to the image. Yes, that is a fair point. The viewfinder in the 'path of control' rather than in the 'path of the image' being recorded, whether film or digital. So, no impact on the image quality, but a potential impact on the quality of the image... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted January 8, 2016 Share #24 Posted January 8, 2016 the view on that glorious ground glass beats any modern viewfinder hollow, especially those TV sets that pass for viewfinders nowadays. Agree completely! But although it isn't as pleasing to view through as the Visoflex, it gets me shots the Viso didn't (mainly closeups), simply because the Viso never made it into my travel kit (due to weight and size, and the bother of attaching/detaching it every time) whereas the tiny, almost-weightless, quick-on-quick-off EVF is always along in case of need. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.