Nifty Fifty wrote:
To be honest? Personally, I find all EVFs more or less unattractive compared to a good optical viewfinder (OVF), at least in daylight. Even the one in the A7Rv, which many claim is comparable to a ground glass screen, something I completely disagree with. For me, it's simply the least unpleasant. I also think that the optics used are at least as important as the resolution. For example, I find the 3.7MP EVF of the Z6 more pleasant than the 3.7MP EVF of the A7iv (and the one in the Z8 is supposed to be significantly better at the same resolution). And what surprised me most: In a direct comparison, I found the 3.7MP EVF of the A7iv clearly more pleasant than the 5.xMP EVF of the Leica Q3. The Leica owner, by the way, felt exactly the same.
Simply comparing the specifications on paper is completely pointless here. In my humble opinion.
Unless, of course, you're only comparing Sony EVFs with each other and assuming that the viewfinder optics are comparably good or bad. In that case, I would also say that 5.x MP is better than 3.7 MP and 9.x MP is better than 5.x MP.
But how significant the respective advantage is, and above all, what price premium it justifies, is certainly a matter of personal opinion....Show more →
Maybe you can try the Leica SL2 or SL3. I have the Q3 but also the SL2-S. The EVF of the SL2-S is clearly better.
If everything works out, I will compare the Leica SL2-S EVF against the EVF of the Sony A7 IV. I might be wrong but normally the Sony A7 IV EVF cannot be as good (normally not even close) to the one of the Leica SL. But of course, I'm happy to be surprised or proven wrong. Looking through the viewfinder of the Leica SL2, or certainly the SL3, for the first time is quite astonishing. I won't forget that day. It was fantastic. For the first time, it wasn't immediately like looking through an electronic viewfinder. Now, that viewfinder is already a few years old. I'm curious to see what the future holds. And especially to see what the EVF of the A7 IV or V is really like.
zeitlos wrote:
One thing is still not entirely clear to me. Is the eye-focus of the A7 V better than that one in the A1 II? As I understood the A7 V has a new (and additional) chip which the A1II lacks? So for subject recognition and tracking, the A7 V is better? I'm thinking about buying the A1II instead of the A7 V even though it's way too expensive for me and my needs, but I want to have a really good EVF. I assume, the one in the A1II is clearly better.
The A1 II received a major firmware update to its AI AF in late October, about six weeks ago. In other words, the A1 II algorithms have continued to evolve and improve. Given the greater processing power and sensor speed of the A1 II, I think it is unlikely that the A7V will have anything that exceeds the A1 II for AI AF. In my experience, the A1 II October update produced a significant improvement in AF, especially in the speed of Auto acquisition.
zeitlos wrote:
The EVF of the SL2-S is clearly better.
If everything works out, I will compare the Leica SL2-S EVF against the EVF of the Sony A7 IV.
I think you can save yourself the trouble. I'm sure the EVF of the A7iv is clearly inferior.
zeitlos wrote:
I might be wrong but normally the Sony A7 IV EVF cannot be as good (normally not even close) to the one of the Leica SL. But of course, I'm happy to be surprised or proven wrong.
Given the large viewfinder optic, I can certainly imagine that the SL's EVF is relatively good. The A7IV's EVF, in my opinion, is more acceptable or adequate, nothing more. That's why I was so surprised that I liked the Q3's viewfinder even less. But who knows? Perhaps it was poorly configured. For example, the image on the A7IV looks significantly worse when you set it to 120Hz because the resolution is automatically reduced from high to normal.
zeitlos wrote:
Looking through the viewfinder of the Leica SL2, or certainly the SL3, for the first time is quite astonishing. I won't forget that day. It was fantastic. For the first time, it wasn't immediately like looking through an electronic viewfinder.
Well, if the SL were as big and heavy as an A7, I might already have one.
zeitlos wrote:
Now, that viewfinder is already a few years old. I'm curious to see what the future holds. And especially to see what the EVF of the A7 IV or V is really like.
As already mentioned, I think you'll be disappointed.
If the A7v had the the 9MP viewfinder of the more expensive models and a focus assist feature like Nikon's, I would have bought one. A faster shutter speed would also have been welcome. But unfortunately, they only improved things that don't interest me personally(besides the display). Too bad.
arbitrage wrote:
Do we know if Sony drops resolution during focusing/shooting with their 3.7M EVF like they do with the 5M and 9M ones?
If they don't drop resolution then the view during actual shooting should be equal to the 5M one and not as far off of the 9M one as it would be if the 9M didn't drop.
The last time I used this EVF was my A9/A9II (at least I think that is the same EVF??) and it was fine to get the job done.
I think what I would notice more is going from 0.9x mag on an A1II to 0.78x mag on the A7V. That large expansive view on the A1/A1II (when not in 240hz mode) is great. That said, I do use my A1II in 240Hz some of the time and I'm not that bothered by the lower mag view. That is 0.76x mag....Show more →
I tried to do some research if any early reviewers are mentioning EVF resolution drop when shooting high fps, and I couldn't find anything yet. But I think it is fair to assume even the 3.7mdot EVF will drop in resolution as well as it seems like a fundamental design philosophy of Sony at this point. Doing 30 fps while doing 60 AF calcs/sec in AF-C mode on a 33mp sensor, I assume it will prioritize that over EVF quality.
zeitlos wrote:
Always in AF-C mode or only when taking continuous shots?
Always. As long as the shutter button is half-pressed. When you release it, the display quality improves again. It works the same way as the A7Rv or A1 and A1ii.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
Always. As long as the shutter button is half-pressed. When you release it, the display quality improves again. It works the same way as the A7Rv or A1 and A1ii.
This is super weird. Because on A1 the res drops to about 5M I'd say. So, if you're on normal viewfinder quality, then you don't see the drop when focusing.
Why would it drop below on 3.7M EVF is beyond me...
This will be irrelevant to most, but the evf display doesn’t drop resolution when you manually focus. That’s one of my biggest pleasures about the A7R5- it’s huge and beautiful .9x magnification viewfinder with all 9mp when using manual focus lenses. On an f1.4 or f/1.0 lens, it’s a joy looking through the viewfinder.
j4nu wrote:
This is super weird. Because on A1 the res drops to about 5M I'd say. So, if you're on normal viewfinder quality, then you don't see the drop when focusing.
Why would it drop below on 3.7M EVF is beyond me...
I don't understand this statement.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
I don't understand this statement.
In short, on A1 using normal viewfinder quality option means the resolution is around 5.7M (more or less AFAIR).
Using the high viewfinder quality option, enables the max resolution of the EVF -> 9.44M .
Now, when focusing on high setting, the res drops to more or less 5.7M, as it looks the same as normal viewfinder quality option. When focusing on normal setting, there is no res drop.
mudlake wrote:
That’s one of my biggest pleasures about the A7R5- it’s huge and beautiful .9x magnification viewfinder with all 9mp when using manual focus lenses. On an f1.4 or f/1.0 lens, it’s a joy looking through the viewfinder.
I certainly don't want to contradict you, because that's how it is for you. However, because I'd read this opinion quite often, and because a former A7IV user who switched to the A1II was somewhat disappointed (having expected more from its EVF based on these very opinions), I went to Calumet with my A7IV and two 50mm f/1.2 lenses to form my own opinion. Yes, the A7RV's EVF was definitely better, no question, but I didn't find it quite as fantastic as I'd expected based on all the rave reviews. What I found most impressive was the ability to reduce the magnification at the touch of a button to improve the overview. Of course, I would have much preferred the 9MP EVF to the 3.6MP one. But is it worth the current extra cost? Frankly, not for me, because it's simly not good enough for that money. I was considering getting a grey A7Rv for €2400, but decided against it because I don't really like the bulky display mechanism(although I personally loved the larger, better display), I don't want a 61MP sensor (which I'd only use as 26MP anyway), and I don't want to add 60g of weight for all that. And then the rolling shutter also scares me a bit, because it is supposed to be even worse than in the 7 IV. So everyone has it's own perspective on things. 😇
And maybe I'll change mine one day.. 😄
j4nu wrote:
In short, on A1 using normal viewfinder quality option means the resolution is around 5.7M (more or less AFAIR).
Using the high viewfinder quality option, enables the max resolution of the EVF -> 9.44M .
Now, when focusing on high setting, the res drops to more or less 5.7M, as it looks the same as normal viewfinder quality option. When focusing on normal setting, there is no res drop.
I hope it's clear enough for you now .
And it's exactly the same with the 3.7MP EVF, except that there is no information for this viewfinder about its "normal" resolution, to which it drops in AF-C mode when the "high resolution" of 3.7 MP is set.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
And it's exactly the same with the 3.7MP EVF, except that there is no information for this viewfinder about its "normal" resolution, to which it drops in AF-C mode when the "high resolution" of 3.7 MP is set.
Yes, that's the part I don't understand.
50mpx stacked sensor is only good enough for 5.7M EVF feed.
33mpx non-stacked sensor is only good enough for 2.3(?)M EVF feed.
24mpx global shutter sensor is finally good enough for 9.44M EVF feed.
Rumors are being addressed on the German channel that the new A7V supposedly no longer properly supports third-party lenses. If that were true, it would be a massive own goal.
He's eagerly waiting for his copy. He should already have received it. He will of course veryify or falsify this rumour then. If anyone knows already, let us know. Surely crucial for a lot of people.
j4nu wrote:
Yes, that's the part I don't understand.
50mpx stacked sensor is only good enough for 5.7M EVF feed.
33mpx non-stacked sensor is only good enough for 2.3(?)M EVF feed.
24mpx global shutter sensor is finally good enough for 9.44M EVF feed.
How did you get the idea that the EVF resolution has anything to do with the sensor resolution? Those are two completely different things. Which viewfinder is used is a marketing decision. Technically, the processor might play a role, but that's about it.
zeitlos wrote:
Rumors are being addressed on the German channel that the new A7V supposedly no longer properly supports third-party lenses. If that were true, it would be a massive own goal.
He's eagerly waiting for his copy. He should already have received it. He will of course veryify or falsify this rumour then. If anyone knows already, let us know. Surely crucial for a lot of people.
()
Assuming any of this is even true, that's not an "own goal" or even a Sony problem. They develop their cameras for their lenses. Third parties are responsible for making sure they are compatible. If not, they can issue firmware updates or barring that, just make a new lens.
If you want to ensure full compatibility, buy a Sony lens. Otherwise, you have to accept that new camera models with new technologies might simply not have full compatibility with your lens. Its the price your pay for saving money.
jhapeman wrote:
Assuming any of this is even true, that's not an "own goal" or even a Sony problem. They develop their cameras for their lenses. Third parties are responsible for making sure they are compatible. If not, they can issue firmware updates or barring that, just make a new lens.
If you want to ensure full compatibility, buy a Sony lens. Otherwise, you have to accept that new camera models with new technologies might simply not have full compatibility with your lens. Its the price your pay for saving money.
I see things differently than you, or rather, I agree with Wiesner in the video. Sony's advantage lies in its wide range of lenses, especially from third-party manufacturers. Competitors are now building equally good, if not better, camera bodies. But then it's good for Sony if their customers wouldn't have a problem with such a change in strategy. For me, a key reason for choosing the Sony system would disappear.
But I'd say let's wait and see. Right now, it's just rumors (where did they originate from?).
zeitlos wrote:
I see things differently than you, or rather, I agree with Wiesner in the video. Sony's advantage lies in its wide range of lenses, especially from third-party manufacturers. Competitors are now building equally good, if not better, camera bodies. But then it's good for Sony if their customers wouldn't have a problem with such a change in strategy. For me, a key reason for choosing the Sony system would disappear.
But I'd say let's wait and see. Right now, it's just rumors (where did they originate from?).
Absolutely. One of the biggest reasons why I would buy a Sony at this point is the vast non-native lens selection. Of course, other people have different reason for buying a Sony, but I cannot imagine that I am the only one.
I have of course no idea if this rumor is true, but I think Sony may be realizing the lens landscape is changing. In the olden days you had the expensive top-notch Sony lenses and cheaper third party lenses that one way or another were seen as being inferior. Nowadays, companies like Viltrox put out lenses that are viewed (rightly or wrongly) as being as good as their Sony equivalent, possibly eating into Sony lens sales. A not untypical management reaction to this might be to limit compatibility, not realizing that it might hurt their brand far more than a few lost lens sales.
zeitlos wrote:
I see things differently than you, or rather, I agree with Wiesner in the video. Sony's advantage lies in its wide range of lenses, especially from third-party manufacturers. Competitors are now building equally good, if not better, camera bodies. But then it's good for Sony if their customers wouldn't have a problem with such a change in strategy. For me, a key reason for choosing the Sony system would disappear.
But I'd say let's wait and see. Right now, it's just rumors (where did they originate from?).
I get that, but I don't ever want my camera manufacturer to hold back on developing new capabilities because they are trying to ensure backwards compatibility with third-party lenses or other accessories. That's on the manufacturers of *those* products, not Sony. They get the advantage of selling to the market of Sony buyers, so they are the ones that need to make sure their products are compatible, not the other way around.
.