02-04-2012, 06:52 PM
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1328379726' post='15474']
The E-300 had a tunnel viewfinder. The E-5 had a great one though.
EVFs are not simple though and they require space so the "micro" argument will always fade a little.
[/quote]
I think finders were the biggest problem of the original FT line. One needs to put in a lot of optics to enlarge the tiny screen and in that process loses a lot of light. As a result the E-5 and E-30, due to the finder, have (had) no real size advantage over e.g. the Nikon D-300 and D-7000. If you look at smaller FT DSLRS, despite deploying a more conventional design, the Olympus E-500 has an even worse finder magnification than the E-300. I had a Mamiya 645 Pro with Prism finder for a few days. I tell you, that is a SLR finder <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
With µFT and view-finding via screen or EVF the small four-third sensor really comes to live. The usability advantages of the APS-C or FF due to the larger finder screen are not there nay more. Stand alone finders eat the same space on every camera, I am totally with you. As Sony demonstrates the real difference between an APS-C and µFT mirror less is the depth of the entire she-band when a lens is attached. In my case, I feel to invested in and to satisfied with µFT right now, to change to something else. The advantages to be gained from a switch (about 1 stop in ISO) are not big enough in my view. Right now, who can match the µFT lens line?
Still running an original E-P1, I like something which offers better framing in bright light. The E-M5 might be an option, with the GX-1 or a next generation Pen being alternatives.
The E-300 had a tunnel viewfinder. The E-5 had a great one though.
EVFs are not simple though and they require space so the "micro" argument will always fade a little.
[/quote]
I think finders were the biggest problem of the original FT line. One needs to put in a lot of optics to enlarge the tiny screen and in that process loses a lot of light. As a result the E-5 and E-30, due to the finder, have (had) no real size advantage over e.g. the Nikon D-300 and D-7000. If you look at smaller FT DSLRS, despite deploying a more conventional design, the Olympus E-500 has an even worse finder magnification than the E-300. I had a Mamiya 645 Pro with Prism finder for a few days. I tell you, that is a SLR finder <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />With µFT and view-finding via screen or EVF the small four-third sensor really comes to live. The usability advantages of the APS-C or FF due to the larger finder screen are not there nay more. Stand alone finders eat the same space on every camera, I am totally with you. As Sony demonstrates the real difference between an APS-C and µFT mirror less is the depth of the entire she-band when a lens is attached. In my case, I feel to invested in and to satisfied with µFT right now, to change to something else. The advantages to be gained from a switch (about 1 stop in ISO) are not big enough in my view. Right now, who can match the µFT lens line?
Still running an original E-P1, I like something which offers better framing in bright light. The E-M5 might be an option, with the GX-1 or a next generation Pen being alternatives.
enjoy