Team-BHP - The DSLR Thread

@aim120, I go by real world usage comparisons by virtue of cameras that I use; 2 of which have high res EVFs & 2 that have pentaprism OVFs.

I fully appreciate the positives that each VF "technology" brings to the table. But in the end, I love the OVFs. Look thru a bright penta-prism OVF and there's nothing to match it, especially in low light when I find the EVFs lagging & tearing. Just IMHO please.

I have to disagree with the low light capability of OVF ,they simply can't match a EVF since the image sensor boosts the gain and shows a much brighter image and thats not possible in any OVF.

There is no tearing in new EVF which have OLED or even the epson LCD EVF found in OMD-5.
Tearing is visible only in Field Sequential EVF found in the panasonic m4/3 cameras and older SLT cameras.

As far as lag well like i said its no issue for me i can shoot fast moving objects with ease including low flying fast fighter jets at 8fps.

To me the only drawback of EVF is the details in shadow areas under bright sunlight,although i suspect this can be sorted out via proper calibration.

But i do appreciate a good penta prism OVF found in FF cameras like 5dmk3 and D800 or the A900,they are in a different level.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aim120 (Post 3142096)

I have to disagree with the low light capability of OVF ,they simply can't match a EVF since the image sensor boosts the gain and shows a much brighter image and thats not possible in any OVF. .

Like I said this is one of the positives of the EVF. The increase or gain in the VF makes the subject visible but the colours are blown out. To be specific my observations are from real world use and how each type performs. I am comparing my Olympus OMD and Fuji XE1 viewfinders to the OVF in the Nikon D4 and D800. A fair comparison IMO as these cameras have the best viewfinders in their respective technology type.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aim120 (Post 3142096)

There is no tearing in new EVF which have OLED or even the epson LCD EVF found in OMD-5. .

I find the OMD EVF lags though it does not tear. Pretty disconcerting after a large 100% coverage OVF.

Eventually we all adjust with the positives and negatives of each type. But I won't use my OMD or XE1 for shooting BIF or other fast moving object. The XE1 is a slug. That's where the Nikons step in. The AF is in a different league when it comes to continuous AF mandatory in such cases. The Sony SLT also does a good job.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aim120 (Post 3142096)

I But i do appreciate a good penta prism OVF found in FF cameras like 5dmk3 and D800 or the A900,they are in a different level.

Yes, my comparison is with the best VF from each technology field. I'd prefer an EVF to the tiny OVF in some crop sensor cameras. But given a choice it's always the big bright pentaprism OVF over an EVF. EVF is undoubtedly the future but at this time it has some way to go.

Quote:

Originally Posted by R2D2 (Post 3142400)

EVF is undoubtedly the future but at this time it has some way to go.

Thom feels the same way too. To quote:

"While I mostly prefer the OVF (optical viewfinders) that has previously defined DSLRs, their days are numbered."

I wait for the day when I will lose the flapping reflex mirror from the previous century and get an EVF that gives me all the advantages of the mirror with preferably none of its advantages. As Thom very correctly points out an EVF can only get better with time while the reflex mirror probably reached its zenith a long time ago.

To that end, I will not be buying any more DSLRs. My present bodies will serve me well till the next evolution i.e. the EVF in Nikon's FF camera bodies evolving to a stage where it begins to tick all or nearly all the boxes.

Have a good weekend guys.

I found a strange phenomenon when I took some shots with my Nikon D3200. I wanted to take a snap of a Strawberry falling in a glass of water. I had set this up and pre-focussed the glass. I used a cable release to trigger the camera, shooting in continuous mode. I used a fast shutter speed, 1/4000, f13 and ISO800. Through the VF, it was normal and I could see the glass and the pre-focussed area. But when I imported them into Lightroom, all the pictures were pitch dark and is useless. I then realized that I was severely underexposed when I checked my meter reading. What is strange is that, my NEX-6 would show me through the EVF if it is underexposed or overexposed. Why does the VF in D3200 not show this difference?

Quote:

Originally Posted by joe1980 (Post 3143227)

What is strange is that, my NEX-6 would show me through the EVF if it is underexposed or overexposed. Why does the VF in D3200 not show this difference?

You are probably expecting the VF to display the image as it will be captured. Something that cannot happen with an OVF, only EVF.

Your camera does show metering information. Look carefully at the bottom or side of the VF. It will show a bar with over and under exposure, shutter and Aperture along with other info like metering mode, AF mode etc.

And please read the manual fully to get familiar with the camera. I am typing this using the TBHP app so cannot view and copy/paste the relevant section of the D3200 manual.

Quote:

Originally Posted by joe1980 (Post 3143227)

Why does the VF in D3200 not show this difference?

DOF preview might have helped in this case.

There should be a DOF preview button or an option in menu which shows DOF preview in viewfinder. It basically stops down the lens to the selected aperture so that you can see actual DOF and darkness. It's not same as seeing the preview in EVF because shutter speed and ISO are not taken into account.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gandhi (Post 3143258)

I doubt if the DOF preview feature is available in the D3200. I will check with the user manual and try to figure that out.

The meter reading clearly showed that I was severely underexposed. I was so used to my NEX that I trusted on the EVF to show me the difference and then I look at the meter reading to bring it down to 0. I now know that I have to be extra cautious and have an eye on the meter reading everytime I change the exposure parameters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by joe1980 (Post 3143322)

The meter reading clearly showed that I was severely underexposed. I was so used to my NEX that I trusted on the EVF to show me the difference and then I look at the meter reading to bring it down to 0. I now know that I have to be extra cautious and have an eye on the meter reading everytime I change the exposure parameters.

What you see in the OVF has nothing to do with exposure. All that you get is the framing. For exposure you have to
. Set the Speed/Aperture/ISO as per the meter
. Take a test shot and analyze the Histogram and adjust the setting accordingly.

@joe1980, I finally got access to a PC instead of the phone screen that I typed my previous message from.

Info about the D3200's viewfinder is on page 4 of the manual.

Going thru your message - SS of 1/4000ths, ISO 800 and f22 would lead to underexposure. Please use program auto mode (P) instead of manual (M). This is detailed on page 54 of the manual. You can adjust exposure i.e. either ISO or SS or aperture using the dials and the camera will automatically compensate OR warn you of possible under/over exposure.

When coming from a MLC you will need to get used to a new way of taking photos. For high speed photography you will need good light and/or fast lenses. These cameras are designed for beginners and easy to use.

That said I cannot stress enough that you must read the user manual(s) and get familiar with the camera and lens. This applies to any camera you buy regardless of make, model or technology whether it is MLC/DSLR/SLT. Otherwise you will lose precious time and that moment that you want captured will slip away. Or you could wind up with an over/underexposed or out of focus photo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by R2D2 (Post 3143613)

Thanks for the effort. I realized that I cannot shoot the same way with my DSLR as I was shooting with my NEX. I will have to rely on the camera's meter reading to determine the exposure.

I have been fiddling to get this damn strawberry falling into a glass of water. I was a bit lazy to go out in the sun to shoot this, so had the setup done at home. After about 50 odd shots, I could pick hardly 5 to 7 shots that are at-least viewable. Below are a couple of them. I'm going to ask you friends for critique please?

One failure that I already see is that I did not fill the frame. I should have framed only the glass and the strawberry without all those noise in the background.

Quote:

Originally Posted by joe1980 (Post 3143679)

. Use glycerine with water to raise the density. The strawberry will descend at a slower rate. You can experiment with increasing concentration to get the rate of descent you want.
. Increase light by using soft boxes - lights behind diffusers. That will enable higher shooting speeds
. With 4fps and a reasonably dense mixture (so that the strawberry takes 4-6 seconds to fall) you will get plenty of shots. Remember to get and set the exposure reading before hand, as in general with continuous shooting most cameras to not evaluate light with each shot.

I was today trying to shoot some reflections made my water and oil with a photograph underneath the glass bowl. As I was keen doing this, accidentally a splash of oil git onto my lens outer. I tried wiping it out with the micro fiber cloth, but the surface looks greasy and I'm scared it that is the end of the lens? Is there a way to clear that and bring the surface back to normal? After this, I'm considering to get a UV filter to simply protect the lens from any further damage like this.