Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Olympus

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 9, 2011, 1:05 AM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Bonney Lake
Posts: 51
Default Forgot one...

Oops, meant to post an image of my 'souped up' XZ-1 (courtesy of my FZ28).
Attached Images
 
aaroncgi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2011, 1:49 AM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Bonney Lake
Posts: 51
Default

So I got my VF-3 viewfinder, after I got back from vacation. Unfortunately, it's just not going to work for me. The opening is just way too small for my eyeglassed peepers. In fact, the viewing opening is not any larger than the very small viewfinder on my Panasonic FZ28, which is a bit of a surprise. Putting my glasses right on the viewfinder still doesn't get me close enough to see the entire image in the finder. What I do see is highly detailed, bright, and looks great, but not being able to see the entire image is a deal breaker. I can get closer by removing my glasses, but there is not enough diopter adjustment to correct for my vision. Even with my glasses on, I have to adjust the diopter fully to one extreme to be in focus. But, it wouldn't be an acceptable solution to remove my glasses every time I want to take a shot, anyway.

I'm really disappointed in the VF-3, and I can only imagine this is far inferior to the VF-2, given all it's many praises as the 'best viewfinder in it's class', etc. Also, I find it's much harder to hold the camera two handed with the viewfinder attached, somewhat defeating the point. Sure, I could press the finder up to my glasses, but then it seriously smudges my glasses. And I would hate cleaning my glasses after every shot - I clean them enough as it is.

So, back to Olympus it goes. I have seen a device called a Clearviewer, so I will look into that.

On a better note, I scored a Raynox DCR-1540PRO 1.54x telephoto lens for $20 on eBay. It makes the XZ-1 a beast, as the lens weighs as much or more than the entire camera, but it will be great when needed. Unfortunately, I didn't know that these lenses can only be used at full zoom (at least without vignetting), but can't complain for the price!
aaroncgi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2011, 2:15 AM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Bonney Lake
Posts: 51
Default

Note, added battery life to list of Cons. So far not remotely what's advertised, will keep monitoring.
aaroncgi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 24, 2011, 1:30 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
guillermovilas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hasselt , Belgium
Posts: 794
Default

I'm just about thinking of buying a XZ-1 and i would have liked to have a few details concerning the 2 viewfinders available.

I noticed that the VR3 is cheaper then the VR2 , why ?
I've read that the VR3 has a 920000 mp resolution but i see no details about the VR2 resolution ? Which is best ?

Thanks
__________________
PENTAX K3
Pentax 35mm f/2.4 AL SMC DA
Pentax 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 ED IF SMC P-DA Fish-Eye
guillermovilas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2011, 3:18 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Steven R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guillermovilas View Post
I'm just about thinking of buying a XZ-1 and i would have liked to have a few details concerning the 2 viewfinders available.

I noticed that the VR3 is cheaper then the VR2 , why ?
I've read that the VR3 has a 920000 mp resolution but i see no details about the VR2 resolution ? Which is best ?

Thanks
Hi Guillermo: the VR2 is much superior to the cheaper VR3. Per most users, they definitely rate the more expensive VR2 as by far better. It is designed for the Oly Pen series and it has 1.44 million dot resolution with no artifacts. When they brought out the XZ-1 they also made it able to use the Pen electronic VF.
Steven R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 28, 2011, 9:27 PM   #16
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Bonney Lake
Posts: 51
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guillermovilas View Post
I'm just about thinking of buying a XZ-1 and i would have liked to have a few details concerning the 2 viewfinders available.

I noticed that the VR3 is cheaper then the VR2 , why ?
I've read that the VR3 has a 920000 mp resolution but i see no details about the VR2 resolution ? Which is best ?

Thanks

I presume you read my comments above regarding the VF-3. I returned it to Olympus the same day for the reasons I stated. Based on what I've read/seen of the VF-2, I suspect it is indeed vastly superior, hence the price difference. When I pay nearly half as much for a viewfinder as a complete camera, I expect it to be significantly better than the included viewfinder on a $400-500 camera. In terms of resolution, yes, it's quite good, but usability for me was poor. At least the LCD screen on the XZ-1 is exceptional. Looking back at a typical bridge or superzoom camera LCD, it's amazing how grainy and poor quality is the picture. I don't have too many problems using the XZ-1 LCD in bright sunlight, though LCD aides are available if needed, for way less than a viewfinder.
aaroncgi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2012, 5:43 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 1
Default Vf_2?

I've been using an LCD hood with focusing loop for viewing the OLED outdoors in bright light. I think the VF-2 sounds very nice but I'm afraid it might have the same problems you experienced with the VF-3. I also wear eyeglasses and I fear the VF-2 would have the same diopter problems/limitations that the VF-3 has. Any Eyeglass wearing XZ-1 or M4/3's users have any experience with both viewers has an opinion would be appreciated by this amatuer.
Bobby
zensu11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2012, 6:26 PM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 5
Default New xz-1 user also

Hi, I'm also a new xz-1 user. I have a pentax k5 dslr and love the results from that. After much research I bought a xz-1. I must say that im really impressed by the quality of the lens and the quality of the pictures the camera produces.
I'm usually never really happy with the result of any camera I've had and 90% of the time dive into elements to add a levels and saturation layer. But the so far with the xz-1 that hasn't been the case.
As mentioned above, the lens is great. Yes some CA is present when fully open in high contrast areas such as sky and tree branches etc. One positive from this is that the CA produced is dark green. But step it up to F2.2 and its goodbye CA. I find F4 to be the sharpest setting, but often use F1.8 because its not soft or displays no saturation loss.
The inbuilt ND filter is great and I use that most of the time outdoors. Its easy to set the lens to blur the background. Portraits look great with looking so natural.
I've also got a Fuji x10. I've been running these 2 cameras side by side for over a week. The Fuji is probably better built. The lens has less barrel distortion when fully open, but the luminous purple CA produced is very off putting. As mentioned above, the XZ-1 produces very natural images, that to my eyes require minimal post production tweaking (if any). But the images produced by the x10 look to me to be plastic and over processed. The x10 isn't all bad, but falls short of the XZ-10 in the final images produced.
The only bad points of the XZ-1 are that it can be noisy in shadow areas and the video could do with a better compression format. But my argument would be that I didn't buy the camera for the video quality. I'm going to post some pics taken so comments please. These have been re-sized to forum limits so are not full quality.
Thanks.
Attached Images
     
moose69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2012, 7:34 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Steven R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,910
Default

Hi Moose69: interesting observations. Thanks for sharing, and for the interesting images.
Steven R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2012, 4:00 PM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 5
Default More XZ-1 Pics

Thought i would post a couple more. All untouched and straight out of the camera.
I use Aperture mode, muti-segment metering and natural picture setting.
The portraits were all F1.8 and the view of the park next door, F4.
Attached Images
     
moose69 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 8:41 PM.