Size matters - my dilemma...

Gaz J said:
I’ve used both Panasonic and Olympus menus and compared to Canons they’re absolute garbage.
Click to expand...
So garbage that I don't have to put my glasses on to use them through the evf, umm nope
 
LongLensPhotography said:
They should be separate but maybe this is the limitation of the graphics chip they use. I think using EVF vs LCD is as different as iphone vs ipad so there should be different modes for each.

It will be very interesting indeed to see Nikon and Canon versions.... things are about to get interesting, while at the same time I almost couldn't care less since my kit works just fine.
Click to expand...


Or you could see it as offering smooth transition from looking at the LCD to the evf, if you prefer a minimalist display wouldn't you prefer to have it for both at once?
 
Cagey75 said:
Or you could see it as offering smooth transition from looking at the LCD to the evf, if you prefer a minimalist display wouldn't you prefer to have it for both at once?
Click to expand...

actually no I don't. If and when I shoot with live view from tripod I very much want my level indicator up (it has to be 100% straight and parallel for the work I do) and I really wouldn't mind a good healthy histogram in that big area. If I want to double check the composition I'd revert back to the viewfinder. I find it much easier to align the lines in the interior through the OVF... That's how I use mine.
And if I use those plastic ND grads the OVF is indispensable in getting them arranged properly. LCD just doesn't have that accuracy and dynamic range of a true analog view seeing directly by the eye.
 
I bet the OP regrets posting this :LOL: or is he just :popcorn:
 
Last edited:
Firstly - most of the replies are opinions and it is fairly pointless arguing against an opinion!

Secondly - it is fairly obvious that most of the posters are interested in the camera as a 'gadget' rather than a tool to take decent pictures with - slightly sad IMO

Thirdly - film rules IMO - still produces nicer 'pictures' than any digital camera can :)
 
Fraser Euan White said:
Firstly - most of the replies are opinions and it is fairly pointless arguing against an opinion!

Secondly - it is fairly obvious that most of the posters are interested in the camera as a 'gadget' rather than a tool to take decent pictures with - slightly sad IMO

Thirdly - film rules IMO - still produces nicer 'pictures' than any digital camera can :)
Click to expand...


What camera? If you don't like pointless posts maybe answer the OP then? All of those posts were off topic and I think we're all bored now
 
Fraser Euan White said:
Firstly - most of the replies are opinions and it is fairly pointless arguing against an opinion!

Secondly - it is fairly obvious that most of the posters are interested in the camera as a 'gadget' rather than a tool to take decent pictures with - slightly sad IMO
Click to expand...

errrrrr! Seriously???! This is quite an OPINION! Would you mind backing it up please?

Fraser Euan White said:
Thirdly - film rules IMO - still produces nicer 'pictures' than any digital camera can :)
Click to expand...

OK, another interesting OPINION there. So let's evaluate the case of using film for real estate interior shoots. To get equivalent file size I need medium format with all wideangle lenses. Cost - probably crazy.
Film, development. Cost - an extra £100-200 per shoot, still requiring time in photoshop, dust removal, etc. Timeframe - probably impossible within 2-3 days.
That's a great advice. Thanks.

Perhaps you should concede that it is an extremely niche TOOL for certain fine art projects. Capable - sure it could be, depending. It is similar to driving your vintage 1930s Mercedes as Uber.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
I find all those fancy EVF features are mainly very detracting in my opinion. I got to see them and frankly you put the camera down and then almost blindly compose from what you see. The grid lines and a few AF point triangles is the most I am prepared to put up in the main viewfinder view. I don't mind all the useful text underneath as it is outside of the view.
I would want the AF to do the work, not fancy zoom in, and I think eye AF is a little bit of a gimmick.
I think all those features are great if the EVF is mirrored to ipad or at least larger smartphone for sure.
Histogram is sort of over the top for EVF. unless they really shrunk it down in the corner. As far as my Canon is concerned, post-capture histogram is enough, but I would like to see the actual histogram for the whole image, not JPEG thumbnail!!!! This is next to useless.

There is no reason why you should rely entirely on shutter for very fast capture or any capture at all. Once the global shutter is in, the mechanical one only becomes a protective feature which would quickly disappear or simplify.
In fact with the dual mode camera you can lift up the mirror and shoot like mirrorless with dual pixel AF support looking through EVF while still retaining all standard dSLR functionality and features.

Of course the EVFs will get even bigger and better. And they need to. One day there will be no more need for mirror. But not yet.
Click to expand...

Of course, we all have preferences and some find certain features and not others. I'm not saying that the benefits for mirrorless are for everyone, and there'll always be people who prefer DSLRs, however my point was that imo I think that they can push the capabilities of mirrorless beyond DSLRs and so over time think that they will outsell DSLRs and DSLRs will become 'old hat'
 
Cagey75 said:
What camera? If you don't like pointless posts maybe answer the OP then? All of those posts were off topic and I think we're all bored now
Click to expand...

Not answering the OP?

The OP wants a smaller camera with simple knobs to twiddle - buy a film SLR such as a Nikon FE2; they are light and compact with simple settings and ideal to carry everywhere. The lenses are superb and a lot lighter than their modern day equivalents. He is not a Pro so doesn't have to worry about time frames for development etc.

Learn to enjoy the hobby of photography............. not gadgetry :)
 
Last edited:
LongLensPhotography said:
errrrrr! Seriously???! This is quite an OPINION! Would you mind backing it up please?



OK, another interesting OPINION there. So let's evaluate the case of using film for real estate interior shoots. To get equivalent file size I need medium format with all wideangle lenses. Cost - probably crazy.
Film, development. Cost - an extra £100-200 per shoot, still requiring time in photoshop, dust removal, etc. Timeframe - probably impossible within 2-3 days.
That's a great advice. Thanks.

Perhaps you should concede that it is an extremely niche TOOL for certain fine art projects. Capable - sure it could be, depending. It is similar to driving your vintage 1930s Mercedes as Uber.
Click to expand...

Strange - it wasn't that long ago the film was used for everything - I do know we have moved on and time constraints for professionals may exclude the medium but is the OP a professional?

(A Medium Format film system is much cheaper than something like a Nikon D750 and equivalent lenses. Processing costs I doubt would be £200/shoot.)

A photograph as an image is so much more than resolution and sharpness; something most have become obsessed with IMO. (Not directed at Pro-togs who may need this for clients)

P.S. If I want to get from A to B then I would take my modern car but if I wanted to enjoy the drive and be 'involved' in the experience I would take the classic car any day!!
 
Last edited:
Fraser Euan White said:
Not answering the OP?

The OP wants a smaller camera with simple knobs to twiddle - buy a film SLR such as a Nikon FE2; they are light and compact with simple settings and ideal to carry everywhere. The lenses are superb and a lot lighter than their modern day equivalents. He is not a Pro so doesn't have to worry about time frames for development etc.

Learn to enjoy the hobby of photography............. not gadgetry :)
Click to expand...

Then answer him, not me, seems you're that guy that jumps in late trying to lord over everyone else with lame statements

I'm not a gear head, that's the best part. Have you read any of the posts you're moaning about. Do you sleep with that high horse? Ops question seems to me to be specifically about digital so you are not answering, you are waffling
 
Cagey75 said:
Then answer him, not me, seems you're that guy that jumps in late trying to lord over everyone else with lame statements

I'm not a gear head, that's the best part. Have you read any of the posts you're moaning about. Do you sleep with that high horse? Ops question seems to me to be specifically about digital so you are not answering, you are waffling
Click to expand...

.................not worth a reply TBH!
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Is a reply ^^ :D

Didn't take you long to contradict yourself and join the moans. OP hasn't touched this thread since the other day btw, so it's all pointless now
Click to expand...

Three posts ago you tell me to answer the OP and not you, then two posts later you say it's pointless answering the OP! Then you state a reply of 'Not worth a reply' is 'joining in on a moan', you also say your not a gadget man but you quote on menu systems on all the different cameras you've used... confused.com

(So someone who doesn't visit the forum for a few days has lost interest?......maybe he got fed up with everyone arguing with each others opinion and being rude rather than providing an answer....granted he may have no interest in film but it is an option)
 
Last edited:
Fraser Euan White said:
Three posts ago you tell me to answer the OP and not you, then two posts later you say it's pointless answering the OP! Then you state a reply of 'Not worth a reply' is 'joining in on a moan', you also say your not a gadget man but you quote on menu systems on all the different cameras you've used... confused.com

(So someone who doesn't visit the forum for a few days has lost interest?......maybe he got fed up with everyone arguing with each others opinion and being rude rather than providing an answer....granted he may have no interest in film but it is an option)
Click to expand...

You know he's not after film, so no, you did not really answer him you were trying to be witty. If you truly wanted to help OP you'd have quoted the first post and ignored all the stuff you are now moaning about.

Since you read all of the posts bar the OP then you'll know I merely responded to something ridiculous and unhelpful to begin with, that got the trolls all heated
 
stevewestern said:
I might add a poll to this - XT2, XH1 or what ?
Click to expand...
My main gripes with the XT-2 was the button size and placement (i.e. ergonomics rather than capability) - given these appear to have been addressed in the XH1 that would be my suggestion :) The XH1 wasn't around when I tried the XT-2.

The Fuji lenses seem to be really rather good too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top