gdanmitchell Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
Victor Santos wrote:
I thought the issues with lenses and OVF had to do with the FL, not the physical size. From what it sounds like, OVF disables some features like eye detect, so I may not be using as much as I want anyway.
They didn't have the 33 or 90 for me to try, so I wasn't able to really evaluate much. I did see a Mitakon 35/0.95 that I liked a lot on the X-pro 2. I put an ad out for a 33 though, and think why not give it a run, and if I don't like it, sell it for a small loss, like a rental....Show more →
The two issues play into one another, and they do so differently on different models of the XPro cameras.
It is true that if you put a 90mm lens on an XPro that the OVF frame lines take up a very small portion of the image. I'd have to check to see if the lens intrudes into that small rectangle or not... but I'm positive that it really covers a large portion of the OVF image. You do certainly end up looking at a pretty tiny image are with the long focal length though.
If you use very large normal to wide lenses, where the frame covers a pretty large portion of the OVF view, then you will indeed have parts of the image area blocked by your lens.
The OVF is really designed for use with sort of old-school lenses of moderate focal length and slightly larger maximum apertures.
I do use some lenses that are far from optimized for the OVF: the 80mm macro, the 90mm prime, the 16-55 and 50-140mm zoom, the 23mm f/1.4. (The 35mm f/1.4 is OK, with only minor OVF obstruction.) I _mostly_ use lenses that do work with the OVF, and from my perspective it is useful to still be able to use the others on occasions. I just switch to EVF.
BTW, due to difference in design, I _believe_ that the XPro2 will show the frame of the 14mm lens in OVF, while the newer XPro3 (which eliminated one setting that lets you prioritize for wide or long lenses) will only show 16mm.
Dan
|