Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
I'd say that it's more prophecy than heresy. I rarely use the OVF on my X Pro 1 and it's not the latest and greatest.
I can't see why...
honozooloo
Established
I have tried split focus on the X-T1. I learned photography on Nikon F bodies, so Split Focus is what I'm most accustomed to.
The problem (well for me at least) with Fuji's split focus system is that instead of a piece of ground glass which is more or less ALWAYS in focus, making it clear when you're not properly focused, the Fuji system simulates the effect; the trouble is, of course TTL the EVF is unable to show the split focus area as sharp until you're close to being focused. Maybe my eyes suck, but this solution just didn't work out for me. I couldn't acclimate.
Don't get me wrong, I'm happy there are a variety of options on my X-T1 and in all honesty they aren't BAD...but as many others have said, they just aren't as bang-on reliable as their analog counterparts.
robert blu
quiet photographer
I would like to buy a similar camera...but I'm already 66 times flies and I cannot wait too long
robert
flyalf
Well-known
Thanks for sharing,
This is the kind of experineces I expect to find in reviews, but alas never see.
Imo the EVF MF solutions are great in theory and in product advertismenst, but not good enough for real photography. Anyway the only "electronci" MF solution I am using is focus by meter scale. And even this can be done faster and better on mechanical MF lenses.
Conclusion: MF is only usable by mechanical OVF solutions.
leicapixie
Well-known
The real problem of the M RFDR is digital:
the need for exact focus on sensor,
the craze for ultra speed wide aperture lenses,
that can drift focus and do..
The folks using these lenses have by all accounts, a torrid time, maintaining the needed accuracy.
That is where the live view/EVIL finders are needed.
Auto(mis)focus is OK for slow, small aperture lenses used on kit DSLR zoom lenses,
the smaller formats where everything is easily in focus..
Folks coming from i-phones will be unhappy at lack of depth of field.
Leica will keep making the RF because it is the reason of Leica-M.
Any slight departure could cause havoc!
The Leica M5 was proof.
Will there be auto focus lenses?
Yes a few, but not a whole new line, economically impossible.
the need for exact focus on sensor,
the craze for ultra speed wide aperture lenses,
that can drift focus and do..
The folks using these lenses have by all accounts, a torrid time, maintaining the needed accuracy.
That is where the live view/EVIL finders are needed.
Auto(mis)focus is OK for slow, small aperture lenses used on kit DSLR zoom lenses,
the smaller formats where everything is easily in focus..
Folks coming from i-phones will be unhappy at lack of depth of field.
Leica will keep making the RF because it is the reason of Leica-M.
Any slight departure could cause havoc!
The Leica M5 was proof.
Will there be auto focus lenses?
Yes a few, but not a whole new line, economically impossible.
How can this be predicted?
Luke_Miller
Established
The inherent latency in the EVF, even though measured in fractions of a second, means that what you saw in the viewfinder when you released the shutter is not exactly the image that is recorded. Sometimes that difference is pretty dramatic. When shooting, street, events or dramatic productions and trying to capture a fleeting expression, gesture, or a specific composition of milling subjects the EVF latency makes that very difficult. It is amazing how quickly things change with animated subjects. With an EVF ones choices are to shoot with both eyes - using the EVF for basic composition and the naked eye to determine when to release the shutter - or shoot bursts of images and hope that one proves to be usable. I don't have to do this with my OVF bodies. The effect of the latency is easy to see. Just look through the EVF at sometning that is changing - like someone in conversation - and observe with the naked eye the difference in the two wiews.
I use EVF bodies and think the EVF is a marvelous device that will only get better going forward. But at the moment it is not a universal solution.
I get what you meant, I just haven't had it effect my images... and I do street photography a lot.
Luke_Miller
Established
Understand. Probably not a factor in 90% of my shooting. But a big issue on occasion. Nothing more frustrating than to release the shutter on the perfect shot and then chimp and see the camera recorded something different. I think one factor on how important it is - is if one is doing paid work. When being paid I don't have the luxury of missing many shots.
willie_901
Mentor
It may seem odd, but EVF lag (X-T1) has only annoyed me during the 1-2% of the time I've done sport photography of family members (tennis). Nevertheless, I prefer the X-Pro1 OVF for candid photography.
I will also risk heresy and mention automated bursts of exposures enables one to choose between several different decisive moments when editing candid work. Fast camera CPU technology and high-speed storage cards eliminate the disadvantages of this technique.
I have pushed the shutter button just that much ™ too late with SLRs and RF cameras.
EVF or no EVF, anticipation is a skill one learns... an intuitive technique that has to be developed and honed.
With current technology I don't find EVF lag is not a handicap. However inappropriate menus settings can increase the total time. For example using (AF) every time on presses the shutter button even though refocusing is redundant. But many people don't know this.
I will also risk heresy and mention automated bursts of exposures enables one to choose between several different decisive moments when editing candid work. Fast camera CPU technology and high-speed storage cards eliminate the disadvantages of this technique.
I have pushed the shutter button just that much ™ too late with SLRs and RF cameras.
EVF or no EVF, anticipation is a skill one learns... an intuitive technique that has to be developed and honed.
With current technology I don't find EVF lag is not a handicap. However inappropriate menus settings can increase the total time. For example using (AF) every time on presses the shutter button even though refocusing is redundant. But many people don't know this.
Baby of Macon
Well-known
I have to say that I find the latency of the X-T1 a real pain. Its enough to make me only use the camera on those occasions when I absolutely can't use an SLR.
Perhaps I've been using EVFs for so long that I anticipate the lag. I have no idea... but I also only look through the VF for a second or so for most street shots.
Luke_Miller
Established
True enough. I've shot high school softball with my EVF body to good effect. With a bit of practice I can anticipate when to release the shutter in order to catch the batter making contact with the ball. Unfortunately, anticipation requires one to have an understanding of what is going to happen next, so that the shutter is released in time to capture "next'. With random activity "next" is difficult to predict.
Of course I have my own latency. That time between deciding to take the shot and when my finger actually depresses the shutter. And all cameras seem to have a measurable (but very short) period of time before the shutter actually opens after depressing the release. So I miss shots because I can't react fast enough. With an OVF I know that immediately since I am watching the subject in real time and can see what was going on when the shutter fired. With an EVF I have to chimp before I know if I got the shot when shooting dynamic subjects.
honozooloo
Established
I'm gonna agree here...the qouted EVF latency is .005 milliseconds on the X-T1. Human perception of EVF lag is in the order of tenths of a millisecond if I remember correctly. Actual shutter lag (including AF lock time) on the X-T1 has been qouted at around 14ms to lock AF and fire the shutter. And other mirrorless systems like the OM are even shorter I think. Of course this is under ideal AF conditions. My reflexes are probably more like a few dozen milliseconds, forget about one 5 thousandth. I am not debating the existence of lag, but personally since I have crappy reflexes I'd chalk up missed shots to my own lack of timing.
Aren't most film Leica Ms in the 10-15 millisecond range shutter latency-wise? I remember seeing the M9 was in the order of 80ms worth of lag. Of course the optical VF is lagless (duh) but in actual use, shutter lag is just a part of having a camera that obeys the laws of physics. EVFs are definitely different than their analog counterparts, but I wonder if it's because they're objectively inferior, or if it's just that we've all spent years or decades developing a "feel" for how our OVF Ms and SLRs shoot. The EVF still makes me feel like a fish out of water in some fast-paced situations too.
In the end it's just a matter of getting used to how your tool of choice functions and in a way, decisive shots are all about intuition and knowing your camera, as most of us normal humans have slower reaction times than our cameras.
EDIT: Did a little digging, and it turns out image-resource.com tested the X-T1's lag and if prefocused shutter lock time/lag (also in MF mode, the subject of discussion) is .051 sec, AKA 51 milliseconds. So if one was accustomed to the 15 milliscond lag on a film Leica M, yeah I suppose shutter lag on an EVF based camera could feel a little pokey. The new M240 seems to be in the same range of 50something milliseconds, sooo...these newfangled cameras are a little slower. I suppose I'm not critical enough to notice though?
Last edited:
Luke_Miller
Established
Can't speak to the Fuji cameras, but the Nikon EVF bodies I shoot with have visible EVF lag. I have no doubt this will eventually be a non-issue in all cameras.
Here is a real world example. I was on vacation with my Nikon V1, which has a reasonably fast EVF. Trying to photograph a landmark from across a busy street. I would compose, focus, and watch through the EVF until the street was free of vehicles before releasing the shutter. After four consecutive shots with half a car in the frame I needed a new approach. I had to use my left (non-viewfinder eye) eye to view the scene and use it rather than the viewfinder to determine when the street was clear.
Here is a real world example. I was on vacation with my Nikon V1, which has a reasonably fast EVF. Trying to photograph a landmark from across a busy street. I would compose, focus, and watch through the EVF until the street was free of vehicles before releasing the shutter. After four consecutive shots with half a car in the frame I needed a new approach. I had to use my left (non-viewfinder eye) eye to view the scene and use it rather than the viewfinder to determine when the street was clear.
krötenblender
Well-known
Just a thought, why lag may be more of an issue for the optical rangefinder fan: with the traditional RF you can see out of the frame, which gives you a limited type of precognition. Through the OVF of a rangefinder (not of a SLR), you can see (and get used to see, as I am) how the scene and composition will look like in a moment. This will give you a clear advantage for the "decisive moment".
For me, this is one of the most important and enjoyable aspects of the RF-experience. I also use a pretty good EVF (E-M1) very often and it's okay. But there is nothing and will never be something like the RF-experience.
For me, this is one of the most important and enjoyable aspects of the RF-experience. I also use a pretty good EVF (E-M1) very often and it's okay. But there is nothing and will never be something like the RF-experience.
Ben Z
Mentor
Agree 100%. The only reason I am willing to pay Leica's price is because it's the only current digital camera with an optical rangefinder. I do not like EVF's. I feel like I'm watching TV through a keyhole. It gives me a feeling of one more degree of separation from the subject. If not a rangefinder, then I would use a reflex. I have the EVF for my M240, use it in specialized situations. It's a useful accessory for me, but I would not pay Leica prices for an EVF-only camera, period, full stop.
willie_901
Mentor
This data for the X-T1 was reported by Imaging Resources.
"Shutter Lag (manual focus): 0.155
Shutter lag (full AF, with flash): 0.55
Shutter Lag (prefocused): 0.051
Shutter Lag (notes): Full AF lag, Multi-area AF mode = 0.151s"
This is with the initial firmware.
Here is their data for the SONY A77 II
"Shutter Lag (manual focus): 0.095
Shutter lag (full AF, with flash): 0.21
Shutter Lag (prefocused): 0.051"
Now the Olympus EM-5 II
"Shutter lag (full AF, wide/mid): 0.14
Shutter Lag (manual focus): 0.068
Shutter lag (full AF, with flash): 0.34
Shutter Lag (prefocused): 0.046
"
No doubt latency or lag can be longer with some combinations of menu parameters for these cameras. In particular some of the older, larger, Fujinon lenses exhibit longer lag times because of older AF mechanisms. And the 60 mm macro (well, not really a macro) lens was slow on purpose because Fujifilm assumed macro focus was more difficult.
I could never focus a rangefinder or MF SLR faster than about 1/2 a second. I doubt I ever focused one that fast.
"Shutter Lag (manual focus): 0.155
Shutter lag (full AF, with flash): 0.55
Shutter Lag (prefocused): 0.051
Shutter Lag (notes): Full AF lag, Multi-area AF mode = 0.151s"
This is with the initial firmware.
Here is their data for the SONY A77 II
"Shutter Lag (manual focus): 0.095
Shutter lag (full AF, with flash): 0.21
Shutter Lag (prefocused): 0.051"
Now the Olympus EM-5 II
"Shutter lag (full AF, wide/mid): 0.14
Shutter Lag (manual focus): 0.068
Shutter lag (full AF, with flash): 0.34
Shutter Lag (prefocused): 0.046
"
No doubt latency or lag can be longer with some combinations of menu parameters for these cameras. In particular some of the older, larger, Fujinon lenses exhibit longer lag times because of older AF mechanisms. And the 60 mm macro (well, not really a macro) lens was slow on purpose because Fujifilm assumed macro focus was more difficult.
I could never focus a rangefinder or MF SLR faster than about 1/2 a second. I doubt I ever focused one that fast.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
My problems with EVFs are more-or-less personal to me, or at least to those who have similar eyesight imperfections to mine. It's pretty simple: I need to wear glasses for clear distance vision and (now that my eyes are aging) I have to take my glasses off (or at least away from my eyes) for clear vision close up. For example, now I can only read without glasses.
When I use an OVF I leave my glasses on and see through the OVF to my subject. If I'm not looking through the finder I can still see my subject clearly with my glasses on. With an EVF, however, I'm looking at a small TV screen very close to my face. To see the EVF clearly I have to remove my glasses. To see my subject clearly I have to put them back on. Rinse and repeat... I don't like working that way, I find it annoying and it affects my photography badly (and I need all the help I can get, not added problems). So I won't use an EVF.
But that's specific to me and my eyesight, and nothing to do with EVFs as a general proposition. In fact I'm somewhat jealous of those who can get along with EVFs as I can see advantages or, at the very least, cameras which would otherwise be attractive to me except that I can't get on with their EVFs.
But, as I say, that's just me and I'm sure EVFs are great for others.
...Mike
When I use an OVF I leave my glasses on and see through the OVF to my subject. If I'm not looking through the finder I can still see my subject clearly with my glasses on. With an EVF, however, I'm looking at a small TV screen very close to my face. To see the EVF clearly I have to remove my glasses. To see my subject clearly I have to put them back on. Rinse and repeat... I don't like working that way, I find it annoying and it affects my photography badly (and I need all the help I can get, not added problems). So I won't use an EVF.
But that's specific to me and my eyesight, and nothing to do with EVFs as a general proposition. In fact I'm somewhat jealous of those who can get along with EVFs as I can see advantages or, at the very least, cameras which would otherwise be attractive to me except that I can't get on with their EVFs.
But, as I say, that's just me and I'm sure EVFs are great for others.
...Mike