If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
EVF - is 115,000 enough? Or is 205,000-230,000 really what is needed?
I'm curious about EVF's for superzoom cameras. One I'm looking
at has 115,000 pixels for the EVF, and I'm curious how well that is working for most folks. Is it sufficient for clear focus at specific points, or does that EVF resolution make it difficult to achieve the precise focus that one may want? Is a higher resolution on the EVF obviously preferred? Or is 115,000 sufficient for most folks? Thanks |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
EVF - is 115,000 enough? Or is 205,000-230,000 really what is needed?
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
EVF - is 115,000 enough? Or is 205,000-230,000 really what is needed?
On Tue, 22 May 2007 11:27:04 +0000, Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
I'm curious about EVF's for superzoom cameras. One I'm looking at has 115,000 pixels for the EVF, and I'm curious how well that is working for most folks. Is it sufficient for clear focus at specific points, or does that EVF resolution make it difficult to achieve the precise focus that one may want? Is a higher resolution on the EVF obviously preferred? Or is 115,000 sufficient for most folks? Thanks I found that in looking through one (canon s31s and a couple of other brands as well) and then comparing with a higher res model from Kodak that the difference was striking - I strongly suggest you do a 'side by side' at a camera store, best buy, whatever. For me the difference was enough just looking through the viewfinder that I was not willing to find out if I could live with the lower res versions. I bought a Kodak P850 (refurb) from Kodak's online store for $250 and I'm quite pleased with the purchase. If you decide to go Kodak, I'd suggest the P series as it has quite a few more features than the Z series - saves raw, tiff, jpeg - has full manual mode . . . |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
EVF - is 115,000 enough? Or is 205,000-230,000 really what is needed?
Paul D. Sullivan wrote:
I'm curious about EVF's for superzoom cameras. One I'm looking at has 115,000 pixels for the EVF, and I'm curious how well that is working for most folks. Is it sufficient for clear focus at specific points, or does that EVF resolution make it difficult to achieve the precise focus that one may want? Is a higher resolution on the EVF obviously preferred? Or is 115,000 sufficient for most folks? Thanks Paul, You can manage with "115K", but the VGA resolution EVF in the Minolta A2 (advertised as "900,000 pixels") was much nearer to something which provided a comfortable view. I find that with auto-focus, and the much larger depth-of-field of the small-sensor cameras, I don't tend to use the EVF for precision focussing (and remember that DSLRs have long abandoned the focussing aids like split-image and micro-prism used in earlier film SLRs). I am unsure why other manufacturers (or even Minolta themselves) did not follow-up on the VGA resolution EVF. Cost and sensor readout bandwidth may come into it. Cheers, David |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
EVF - is 115,000 enough? Or is 205,000-230,000 really what is needed?
wrote in message
... On Tue, 22 May 2007 11:41:49 -0400, M-M wrote: In article , wrote: A low-resolution EVF and smaller sensor sizes are the ONLY things preventing single-lens, long-zoom cameras from vastly surpassing dSLRs in performance and functionality. They already surpass dSLRs in every other way, such as real-time preview showing the exact image you are going to get, movies, longer shutter/performance life-span, faster flash-sync speeds, etc. You forgot about shutter lag, which puts DSLR's way ahead. Sensor size and noiseless long exposure ability also. And start-up time, bokeh, faster AF. I could go on. Yes, you could go on, but you'd be wrong on all counts. There are ways around the shallow DOF caused by small sensor sizes and being able to create nice bokeh effects. (I won't bother sharing, you'd only want an argument on how its done.) Shutter lag? What shutter lag? My new P&S is every bit as fast if not faster than any dSLR that has to wait for last century's mirror to quit flapping around making all that noise. Ah! I was just starting my search for a P&S with short shutter lag, to replace an old Canon PS. What P&S do you have? Is it EVF only, or optical too? Ta. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
EVF - is 115,000 enough? Or is 205,000-230,000 really what is needed?
wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2007 11:41:49 -0400, M-M wrote: In article , wrote: A low-resolution EVF and smaller sensor sizes are the ONLY things preventing single-lens, long-zoom cameras from vastly surpassing dSLRs in performance and functionality. They already surpass dSLRs in every other way, such as real-time preview showing the exact image you are going to get, movies, longer shutter/performance life-span, faster flash-sync speeds, etc. You forgot about shutter lag, which puts DSLR's way ahead. Sensor size and noiseless long exposure ability also. And start-up time, bokeh, faster AF. I could go on. Yes, you could go on, but you'd be wrong on all counts. Nonsense. There are ways around the shallow DOF caused by small sensor sizes and being able to create nice bokeh effects. Yeah, use an SLR. Shutter lag? What shutter lag? My new P&S is every bit as fast if not faster than any dSLR that has to wait for last century's mirror to quit flapping around making all that noise. Which one is that? I know of SLRs that take 10 pictures per second. Long exposures? Who needs them with a camera that can shoot in the pitch dark at fast shutter speeds using IR light only. What a stupid statement. You dSLR folk sure are insecure about needing to hold onto why you wasted that much money, aren't you. Your problem, not mine. Look in the mirror. -- Ray Fischer |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
EVF - is 115,000 enough? Or is 205,000-230,000 really what isneeded?
Ray Fischer wrote:
wrote: Long exposures? Who needs them with a camera that can shoot in the pitch dark at fast shutter speeds using IR light only. What a stupid statement. I wouldn't say that. I would say that this was actually one of the more hilariously stupid things I've ever seen. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
EVF - is 115,000 enough? Or is 205,000-230,000 really what isneeded?
Grumps wrote:
wrote in message ... On Tue, 22 May 2007 11:41:49 -0400, M-M wrote: In article , wrote: A low-resolution EVF and smaller sensor sizes are the ONLY things preventing single-lens, long-zoom cameras from vastly surpassing dSLRs in performance and functionality. They already surpass dSLRs in every other way, such as real-time preview showing the exact image you are going to get, movies, longer shutter/performance life-span, faster flash-sync speeds, etc. You forgot about shutter lag, which puts DSLR's way ahead. Sensor size and noiseless long exposure ability also. And start-up time, bokeh, faster AF. I could go on. Yes, you could go on, but you'd be wrong on all counts. There are ways around the shallow DOF caused by small sensor sizes and being able to create nice bokeh effects. (I won't bother sharing, you'd only want an argument on how its done.) Shutter lag? What shutter lag? My new P&S is every bit as fast if not faster than any dSLR that has to wait for last century's mirror to quit flapping around making all that noise. Ah! I was just starting my search for a P&S with short shutter lag, to replace an old Canon PS. What P&S do you have? Is it EVF only, or optical too? Most P&S *these days* have very short delays from half-press to full-press. The problem is, they still focus slowly (contrast-detection autofocus driven off the sensor is much slower than phase-detection autofocus with a dedicated specialized sensor). If something holds still, you can half-press and then wait for the right moment. But this isn't very effective, I find, for children, cats, dogs, or sports. dpreview measures the various delays, check their reviews. My Fuji F11 has a *very* short half-press to full-ress delay, but I find the slow focus annoying (and there's no manual focus as an alternative). |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
EVF - is 115,000 enough? Or is 205,000-230,000 really what isneeded?
David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
Grumps wrote: wrote in message ... On Tue, 22 May 2007 11:41:49 -0400, M-M wrote: In article , wrote: A low-resolution EVF and smaller sensor sizes are the ONLY things preventing single-lens, long-zoom cameras from vastly surpassing dSLRs in performance and functionality. They already surpass dSLRs in every other way, such as real-time preview showing the exact image you are going to get, movies, longer shutter/performance life-span, faster flash-sync speeds, etc. You forgot about shutter lag, which puts DSLR's way ahead. Sensor size and noiseless long exposure ability also. And start-up time, bokeh, faster AF. I could go on. Yes, you could go on, but you'd be wrong on all counts. There are ways around the shallow DOF caused by small sensor sizes and being able to create nice bokeh effects. (I won't bother sharing, you'd only want an argument on how its done.) Shutter lag? What shutter lag? My new P&S is every bit as fast if not faster than any dSLR that has to wait for last century's mirror to quit flapping around making all that noise. Ah! I was just starting my search for a P&S with short shutter lag, to replace an old Canon PS. What P&S do you have? Is it EVF only, or optical too? Most P&S *these days* have very short delays from half-press to full-press. The problem is, they still focus slowly (contrast-detection autofocus driven off the sensor is much slower than phase-detection autofocus with a dedicated specialized sensor). If something holds still, you can half-press and then wait for the right moment. But this isn't very effective, I find, for children, cats, dogs, or sports. dpreview measures the various delays, check their reviews. My Fuji F11 has a *very* short half-press to full-ress delay, but I find the slow focus annoying (and there's no manual focus as an alternative). There's a good chart he http://www.cameras.co.uk/html/shutte...ort=ShutterLag How long does it take your F11 to take five photos? I see it's got a shutter lag of 0.01 second according to dpreview. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Needed | ColynG© | Other Photographic Equipment | 0 | February 12th 05 06:37 PM |
Needed | ColynG© | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | January 30th 05 12:52 AM |
Needed | ColynG© | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | January 30th 05 12:52 AM |
help needed | John and Chris | Digital Photography | 1 | June 23rd 04 11:36 PM |
NEEDED | photonhero | Darkroom Equipment For Sale | 1 | September 12th 03 12:53 AM |