gwilliams6

The Latest EVFs on the best fullframe mirrorless cameras have the same over 3million dots resolution of the best OVFs. You have to see them to know this. It is no longer like watching anything but the real thing. Constant improvements in mirrorless features seem to have caught some folks behind in their experience with the latest pro-quality mirrorless. An EVF allows me to see all my actual exposure, white balance and histogram BEFORE I make the shot. Not possible with any OVF. And no chimping necessary with an EVF either. I can tell you how many times I have seen fellow pros with OVFs chimping and missing the shot right in front of them. Doesn't happen with EVFs , many of which also feature absolutely no-blackouts at high frame rates, so you can actually see what is going on as you track your subject. Any DSLR using OVF will experience viewfinder blackout every time that mirror has to cycle up and down, blocking that image to the OVF.


Once I tried a great EVF, I would never, ever go back to any OVF again, ever. A case in point is this shot I made in Oban, Scotland with my Sony A7RII with a great EVF. This is the shot just as I saw it in my EVF and exposed as a silhouette, knowing in advance, at that instant, that my camera settings were given me this exact shot, without ever taking my eye away from the EVF. An OVF would have shown this to me with the lens max aperture only, I would not have known what exposure or exposure compensation settings would have given me the silhouette effect I wanted. With an OVF I would have had to make a test shot and then chimp at my LCD screen to see if my exposure settings were giving me the effect I desired. In that wasted time I would have lost the bird in flight, who was in that exact flying position for a fleeting instant, and the people may have turned away and out of the composition I wanted.
Using an EVF has saved me so many shots I would have missed with an OVF. My EVF gives me a real professional advantage over other pros using an OVF. I love that. BTW click on download (below the photo, for full res and colors) This is the jpeg, straight out of the camera (with my added watermark) . Cheers

(Download)

gwilliams6

Here are a couple of early A7III shots I made three weeks ago on the Caribbean Island of St. Martin.
PLEASE NOTE: YOU NEED TO CLICK ON "DOWNLOAD' BELOW EACH SHOT TO SEE THE FULL COLORS AND HIGHER RES OF EACH SHOT. AND THESE ARE JUST THE JPEGS (with my added watermark) , STRAIGHT OUT OF THE CAMERA. I always shoot raw + Jpeg, so the raw files would look even better. I will play around with these raw files later, I have been traveling a lot and have gone from St. Martin, back to my new home in Grapevine, Texas and now I am in Michigan in Manistee National Forest for a few weeks. Cheers

(Download)


(Download)

TSHDGTL

The Pentax K1 seems to be made for landscapes with the pixel shift feature.

gwilliams6

This is a nice feature, especially because it is shot and processed in-camera. My Sony A7RIII does pixel shift, shot in-camera, but it has to be post processed. Chalk one up for Pentax. Cheers

mudduck

Yea, the "freeze" after the button push is disconcerting and I've never really liked shooting from the back screen.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

I like the D750 and D810 for FX. Don't overlook the D500 DX – it is an awesome camera. For what you want the D850 would be overkill.

papa Loc: Rio Dell, CA

I shoot a Canon 5D Mark III and a 7D that I had for years before it. The 5D is more camera as I could want, though if I didn't have it I'd be shopping the Mark IV, as it's image is 15% better. FYI, none of my glass is Canon, as they just aren't worth their way too high cost and in many cases lower IQ. I shoot three Tamrons and one Tokina, all 2.8.

Enter MHO, to your question. If I were in your shoes, I'd consider whether or not I would be keeping or replacing my lenses, now or sooner. If replacing them is a preference, then I'd be shopping Tamron 2.8, PERIOD. As for a FF body four would be considered, Canon's 5D III and IV and Nikon's 810 and 850.

Moving from a crop to FF sensor gives a marked difference in performance and IQ. Just ask my lonesome 7D that's used occasionally for extreme reach and not yet for a back up to the 5D Mark III. I love that tool. Whatever you choose I'm certain that moving to full frame will thrill. Best to you and happy shopping.

nadelewitz Loc: Ithaca NY

I'll second that emotion. Why does anyone think electronic viewfinders are an improvement?

RickL Loc: Vail, Az

I use a D810 for landscape and action nature. It is an incredible camera

Good deals on it now

Rick

Bob Locher Loc: Southwest Oregon

Warm blood is a waste of energy; mammals are a temporary aberration.
Color photography is simply a passing fancy and will not endure.
Digital photography is a bunch of nerds showing off; film and chemistry rule.
Nothing will ever equal optical viewfinders and flipping mirrors...

jackpinoh Loc: Kettering, OH 45419

gwilliams6

EVFs are a vast improvement, try the latest and best and learn the truth. Read my post above (with photo from Scotland) showing example about what you can do with an EVF that you can never physically do with ANY OVF. I would never, ever handicap myself again using an OVF. I am a pro and can afford the best equipment I want to use, and I will never go back to any OVF. More and more pros and amateurs alike are discovering this, and this is a major reason they are switching to mirrorless and EVFs. So do the camera makers know this and they are making their next top models with EVFs and mirrorless tech.
https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/5014039475/cp-2018-interviews-the-reign-of-the-dslr-is-almost-over

Keep kidding yourself that OVFs are superior, they aren't anymore . They will still make them for you and others clinging to the old tech and DSLRs, but even the next generation of DSLR camera rumored designs are showing possible hybrid EVFs/OVFs . The camera makers know what viewfinders give us the best features and OVFs have reached their zenith in models like the D850. The top EVFs have the same 3million plus dots of the best OVFs, like in the D850. Yet EVFs are constantly improving and the next generation designs show even more incredible performance, even higher resolution and refresh rates. Cheers

nadelewitz Loc: Ithaca NY

Okay, I'll bow to your knowledge, opinions and possibly your predictions...with just one fact. An optical viewfinder doesn't have or introduce ANY "dots". No pixels. Nothing. It conveys the continuous-tone image just as it exists. Like a lens. Are you comparing the appearance of a matte focusing screen to an EVF?

Selene03

You obviously do good work with your Sony cameras and really find the evf wonderful. Granted I only have the a7iii, an entry level model, and I am just learning how to use it, but I would say that I like it fine in dark night skies, in fact, more than fine (which is why I bought the camera), but I really still prefer by a large margin the ovf on my Canon cameras (both high end and low end). Different people interact with tools and equipment differently. Just because the evf works so wonderful for you in all circumstances, doesn't necessarily mean it is the right choice for everyone. I also do agree that the evfs are much better than they used to be, but I still believe I can see light nuances in the ovf that seem to get washed out in the evf, especially in complex lighting situations (by which I mean complex, not necessarily low light--I will give that one to the evf for sure). In any case, your pictures are terrific and I am glad you found cameras that work so well for you. Maybe some day if I ever have the time to play with them seriously, I can get them to work that well for me. I am not ready to abandon my Canon equipment at this point, but I do like the small size and night sky abilities of the a7iii.

jackpinoh Loc: Kettering, OH 45419

If such absolute accuracy is so important, all photographs must be a huge disappointment to you. No photo viewed on a screen or as a print will ever be as clear as continuous-tone nature --because the image is output as pixels! So what. It is close enough! At some point your eye/brain accepts those pixels as continuous tones.

Your eye and brain the ultimate limitations in resolving images. The best EVFs are already good enough that it makes no difference to my eye/brain that I am not looking through an OVF.