I'm sure the EVF's are getting quicker. I really wonder if we will see both in the same camera someday. With my ancient Sony, there was really no time lag with EVF. But...the sensor was very small so there was less to relay. Just fooling around I was trying to find things that OVF could do, that Live View could not. Well, there still are some things. With the depth of field preview button I was surprised to see that you could adjust the aperture while holding the button down and be able to better frame extremely bright scenes. You can also release the shutter without releasing the depth preview button. (I don't think this was always possible) Obviously the Live View lets you see the frame better in dim lighting. In the end you can get the photo either way, most of the time, but they remain different and complimentary tools! And I want both! I know Live View is not the same as EVF. EVF would be a real net battery life saver if you could have a switchable EVF that deactivated the much larger view screen that live view needs. I guess I know not many seem to agree, but I'd like it.
I feel before I leave this mortal coil, I should own an EF XXmm F/1.0. Is Canon going to man up, or am I going to have to wait for Sigma or China to come through?
You really didn't get it yet?  There already are cameras with OVF + EVF, like the Fuji-Pro or some Sony α types. But to "turn down the lights" in an OVF putting as advantage...? The only real advantage is: an OVF needs no battery. But the rest of the camera does, so I still see no advantage or excuse for a manufacturer to put two different systems in the same space - LiveView is already standard in nearly all DSLRs.
Except of course, a Leica type which doesn't even have a LCD screen... meaning, no histogram, no accurate focus.
Also I don't understand what you want with an f/1.0? Find out, what a wild guess a DSLR AF does with it? Want to reduce the keeper rate? No offense meant, but your theoretical ideas have only theoretical use. Mind games...
Quote:Regardless of the format f0.95 is f0.95, all you are seeing is shallow DOF, but consider other aspects, like available light for the AF system, try using flash lighting and you will find it in another league.
Yesterday was doing a sunset photoshoot using flashes to light faces with sunset behind, DOF was merely the same however 17-55f2.8 was by far more useful than 24-105f4 on full frame ( my 50f1.4 was in another world really)
Many problems with your thoughts...
- f0.95 only means that the aperture is bigger than the focal length. That is what it means... What the size of aperture is only gets clear when you know the focal length.
- The AF system of your DSLR does NOT get more light with an f0.95 lens than with an f2 lens, for instance. It is a misconception that it does. The AF system has its own "aperture" which is the limiting factor. That is why Canon talks about AF points for f5.6 sensitivity and f2.8 sensitivity. It is also why AF points can get (partly) blind with smaller aperture lenses.
- F2.8 on APS-C is never "more useful" than f4 on FF. It can be that the more modern APS-C camera has some advantages over the decade old FF camera, of course.
Quote:You really didn't get it yet? There already are cameras with OVF + EVF, like the Fuji-Pro or some Sony α types. But to "turn down the lights" in an OVF putting as advantage...? The only real advantage is: an OVF needs no battery. But the rest of the camera does, so I still see no advantage or excuse for a manufacturer to put two different systems in the same space - LiveView is already standard in nearly all DSLRs.
Except of course, a Leica type which doesn't even have a LCD screen... meaning, no histogram, no accurate focus.
Also I don't understand what you want with an f/1.0? Find out, what a wild guess a DSLR AF does with it? Want to reduce the keeper rate? No offense meant, but your theoretical ideas have only theoretical use. Mind games...
The Fuji does NOT have a TTL OVF. It is a range finder OVF, which is not such a nice thing to have?
Which Sony camera has an EVF and an OVF, by the way?
Quote:
I feel before I leave this mortal coil, I should own an EF XXmm F/1.0. Is Canon going to man up, or am I going to have to wait for Sigma or China to come through?
Canon's EF 50mm f1.0 L USM had a need of such a big back element that you get pretty funny bokeh disk shapes, the mirror box cuts them off.
Sigma and Zeiis won't come with such a lens most probably, because if f1 already is kind of an issue for the very wide EOS mount, imagine what it is like on all the smaller mounts, like Nikkor's F-mount?
I guess your best bet it to try the Canon f0.95 range finder lens on Sony FE cameras or a Canon EF 50mm f1 on Canon FF.
For now, I have settled on two 55mm f1.2 lenses with (too) narrow mounts from the manual focus era (Canon FL 55mm f1.2 and Nikkor-S•C 55mm f1.2).
Quote:
Many problems with your thoughts...
- f0.95 only means that the aperture is bigger than the focal length. That is what it means... What the size of aperture is only gets clear when you know the focal length.
- The AF system of your DSLR does NOT get more light with an f0.95 lens than with an f2 lens, for instance. It is a misconception that it does. The AF system has its own "aperture" which is the limiting factor. That is why Canon talks about AF points for f5.6 sensitivity and f2.8 sensitivity. It is also why AF points can get (partly) blind with smaller aperture lenses.
- F2.8 on APS-C is never "more useful" than f4 on FF. It can be that the more modern APS-C camera has some advantages over the decade old FF camera, of course.
Well all my three cameras focus more easily in low light with canon 50mm f1.4 than with 17-55f2.8 than 24-105f4L at 50mm.
Saturday evening I was shooting portraits with the sunset in the background, using flashes to light my subject, and yes with Canon 100mm macro at f2.8 I used much lower flash output than with 24-105f4, which resulted on more pleasant skin tones and less contrast and harsh shadows
I can't verify in any way the AF behavior of the 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM in comparison to the EF 50mm f1.4 on your APS-C cameras, so I can't comment on what is causing what.
The 24-1-5mm f4 is an f4 lens, so it surely can't take advantage of f2.8 center cross type AF points.
Not sure where the flash talk fits in?
Quote:Not sure where the flash talk fits in?
flash output depends only on aperture and subject distance, nothing else, so with a fast aperture you need less flash power thus less recycling time for flashes, also with less intense flash output and with the help of the diffused evening lights you have much less shadows, which is more pleasant in portraits, and here I am relating my own experience, maybe there's another explanation, but that's what I saw
Quote:flash output depends only on aperture and subject distance, nothing else, so with a fast aperture you need less flash power thus less recycling time for flashes, also with less intense flash output and with the help of the diffused evening lights you have much less shadows, which is more pleasant in portraits, and here I am relating my own experience, maybe there's another explanation, but that's what I saw
I still don't get it.
If you put the 5D at ISO 400 and the 30D at ISO 100, and you shoot with f2.8 on the 30D and f4 on the 5D, what happens?
Quote:I'm sure the EVF's are getting quicker. I really wonder if we will see both in the same camera someday. With my ancient Sony, there was really no time lag with EVF. But...the sensor was very small so there was less to relay. Just fooling around I was trying to find things that OVF could do, that Live View could not. Well, there still are some things. With the depth of field preview button I was surprised to see that you could adjust the aperture while holding the button down and be able to better frame extremely bright scenes. You can also release the shutter without releasing the depth preview button. (I don't think this was always possible) Obviously the Live View lets you see the frame better in dim lighting. In the end you can get the photo either way, most of the time, but they remain different and complimentary tools! And I want both! I know Live View is not the same as EVF. EVF would be a real net battery life saver if you could have a switchable EVF that deactivated the much larger view screen that live view needs. I guess I know not many seem to agree, but I'd like it.
I feel before I leave this mortal coil, I should own an EF XXmm F/1.0. Is Canon going to man up, or am I going to have to wait for Sigma or China to come through?
That is a standard option these days, AFAIK. Certainly on Oly MFT cameras.
HTH, kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
|
