Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 4, 2004, 8:36 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 69
Default

"digicam" EVF - I got more than a live-preview image, basically just a low-res version of what the camera takes digitally, but usually some more info like: iso, the live histogram, WB settings and sometimes even more. Even If I go manual I got a live-something that looks like the final picture.
"dSLR" OVF - I got a real live-image seeing trough the lenses, can manual focus better (not faster), but... I don't know what I'll have in the final on the card. Should I trust the auto-things beside focus? Should I trust my settings, meaning wb, exposure, metering, etc.? Because I have to enter preview mode and take a good look at... on my low-res viewer on the back.
I am not a photographer... I just take pictures... so don't jump on me if I am somehow wrong...
I think that some people buy a dSLR just because they heard about the wonderful things about them... not knowing what awaits them.
pauza is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 4, 2004, 9:04 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,522
Default

People pick SLR's for more reasons than you've chosen to list.

The ability to mount different lenses, superior image quality with lower noisedue to larger sensors, superior ability to follow and capture subjects in motion. Face it- even the best electronic viewfinders todayare inferior to what you get with an SLR. They freeze at the moment of focus and take long enough to focus and set exposurethat moving subjects have already changed position by the time the darn thing has gotten around to actually taking the picture, so the premise that you actually see what the final image looks like isn't necessarily true. Have you ever tried getting a digicam to focus in low light indoors at the telephoto end ofit's zoom range? In a word,most simplycannot do it beyond 3-4 feet when zoomed into the telephoto range. I tried usinga Canon G5 for a while.If I zoomed beyond the wide angle setting the darn camera simply would not focus beyond a couple of feet- the focus assist beam wasn't strong enough to work and for some reason Canon did not build in the ability for the G5 to utilize the focus assist beam of a mounted flash unit that would have solved the problem, and I've been in the store and specifically tried this same thing with the new Pro 1- the problem still exists with thiscurrent EVF camera.If you take pictures of subjects that don't move digicams are fine. For any subject that actually moves SLR's do focus and record the image faster andare the best way to view and capture it.

Who the heck cares about things like being able to view a white balance setting in the viewfinder when you can shoot in RAW mode and change it to what ever looks better later? Most who buy Digital SLR's today at some point in the past have owned film SLRs, know the advantage in owning them and are willing to trade the low weight advantage for actually being able to take pictures without being frustrated by the limitations digicams present in their current form.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 4, 2004, 9:15 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
ohenry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,676
Default

You summed it up (for yourself) when you said
Quote:
I am not a photographer... I just take pictures...
You're correct...dSLR's are not the tool for someone that just wants to take pictures.
ohenry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 4, 2004, 9:48 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12
Default

pauza wrote:
Quote:
Should I trust the auto-things beside focus? Should I trust my settings, meaning wb, exposure, metering, etc.?
If you're going to invest in dSLR, you really shouldn't be doing auto- anything. AF maybe. I always trust the metering on my 10D and am never really disappointed except when I shoot something that is backlit.

I personally prefer the viewfinder on SLRs because I feel you get more of a real sense of what you're going to end up with than with an EVF. Most EVFs are low resolution and don't really compare with OVFs. Just try manually focusing with one. :?
Conquest10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 4, 2004, 11:13 AM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

I'm going against the flow here, but I believe there's time when the EVF beats the heck out of optical viewfinder... and I've used both

If one takes landscape pictures at night the EVF will let you see exactly what get stored to flash, and also the process is sped up by the live histogram... One also get the pictures right everytime as the exposure also changes in real-time as one adjusts the shutter/aperture.
On my 10D I have to play with the -2..1..v..1..2+ and then review it again on the rear LCD and we all know how slow this is to rasterize on this camera... Most of the time one has to go back and bracket again!

Shall we talk about noise next, because I got excellent pictures from the noisiest camera: the D7, at night straight off from the camera?
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 4, 2004, 11:15 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,522
Default

As I said, with subjects that don't move.......

That process isn't just something the EVF cameras excel at. Any old digicam works, whether it has an optical or electronic viewfinder. In either case you're not viewing through the lens.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 4, 2004, 11:18 AM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Greg Chappell wrote:
Quote:
As I said, with subjects that don't move.......
Check out the A2 sometime... it makes me a believer
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 4, 2004, 11:38 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,522
Default

The A2 is nice....for landscapes. I take my DSLR to hockey, night baseball and football games. I shoot at ISO 400 and800 quite a bit and get very nice, pretty darn clean images straight out of the RAW converter without dickering around with programs like Neat Image, like here:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2553210

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2575068

Until they build a camera like the A2 that can shoot in those type conditions at those ISO ratings with comperable resultsI will always reach for an SLR first, as will anyone else looking to do this type stuff.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 4, 2004, 11:44 AM   #9
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

... and I agree EVF "digicams" are not for everyone
... but so are dSLRs

But I've to admit the A1/A2 track pretty good moving subjects especially in the flex mode: http://home.tiscali.be/johan.branders/A1/A1-focus.htm
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 6, 2004, 5:16 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 69
Default

Thanks NHL, your answer was the kind I was waiting for, too bad that I put a selfdestruct button on the bottom of my message, I might add, an "auto-" button.
pauza is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:19 AM.