Rumored Canon EOS R1 EVF specifications [CR1]

[Del Paso]

It's as if people don't know where their camera is pointing unless they can see through the viewfinder lol

Add this to the list of things people say they care about but don't actually matter, next to top LCD screens and which side of the camera the power switch is on.

Top LCD screens don't matter???
That you don't use or need them doesn't mean they don't matter. I wouldn't buy a camera without one.

 

[Sporgon]

Where can I upgrade to owl eyes?

Eat more carrots!

 

[Maximilian]

Eat more carrots!

And I thought I was almost a rabbit yet

 

[mdcmdcmdc]

Now rumoured spec lists come in slices
Next will be details about the top display

It’s a slow rumor week. Anything that says “R1” gets lots of clicks.

 

[scyrene]

For me it's a resolution thing. I cann't see critical sharpness in an EVF in the same way I can with an OVF.

Fair enough but of course an EVF can show a magnified image, and/or graphical focus indicators, neither of which an OVF can. Fwiw I don't trust my eyes to be able to tell "critical focus" regardless of the technology (until I can see a full resolution image 1:1 on a larger screen).

 

[SwissFrank]

the 4000 nits seems incredibly bright, possibly blindingly bright. my phone is spec'd at about 1000 nits of peak brightness and it can be uncomfortably bright in an indoor environment with low ambient lighting

If you could use it in a bright environment (snow/beach) and still see the image, that'd be useful. In a very dark place you'd want the viewfinder very dark of course. It should be the brightness of an SLR with an f/1 lens.

 

[kten]

I have my R3 set to exposure + DoF preview, and when I shoot with flash only the EVF automatically brightens the scene. That happens only with a flash ready to fire (including off-camera, e.g., with the ST-E10 in the shoe and a flash linked).

I'm on an R body still which I suspect has less options than R3 so sadly can't do that but appreciate the heads up. Not sure if speedlite controllers send more info due to ettl and change things but for me I don't need any more since using basic type of manual trigger (godox XT32) with multiple monoblocks thus my setup basically only uses the trigger pins of the shoe and doesn't send any info to the camera except for the fact a flash trigger is connected. As such I don't miss functionality as I only use the camera display for focus because exposure wise I set each on the studio strobes with light meter independently and can see fine before shots due to modelling lights.

 

[USMarineCorpsVet]

In the dark I can see with an OVF what I could also see with my own eyes and my eyes adapt to the dark quite well. The exposure preview actually is a downside of EVFs for me. It means that the image in the viewfinder constantly changes brightness when I pan around. I prefer to let my own eyes adjust the brightness of my view. I think the OVF simulation of cameras like the R3 is made for people like me.

I wish Canon would bring out a 1D X Mark IV with a stacked BSI sensor.

Sadly that ship has passed. I would buy a 1DX with a 45+ BSI sensor in a heartbeat!

 

[Skyscraperfan]

the 4000 nits seems incredibly bright, possibly blindingly bright. my phone is spec'd at about 1000 nits of peak brightness and it can be uncomfortably bright in an indoor environment with low ambient lighting. since the unit is luminous intensity over a given surface area, I wonder if it's 4000 nits over a smaller surface but by the time it reaches the VF glass, its a lot lower (which is better for my weak eyes anyways)

The 4000 nits are the brightness of the display in the viewfinder. If you enlarge it, it gets darker. A high peak brightness would be wonderful for seeing bright lights in the viewfinder though. It does not look good if highlights are blown out.

- OVFs have black out when shoot fast action in a burst.

- OVFs don’t have live view.

2 problems for which solutions where found.

I hardly do burst and although my camera has live view, I hardly ever use it either. I hate the idea that the sensor is warmed up even while you are composing, while a DSLR sensor is just powered for a fraction of a second during the exposure. It seem like a waste of sensor time for me, if 99.9% of the time the image from the sensor is just generated to show it in the EVF.

Those cameras focus too much on sport, people and action. If you do not care about those areas of photography, the negatives of a mirrorless camera weigh much more.

I have serious doubts about the durability of mirrorless cameras. Will they really survive ten or twenty years? There is so much new stuff that could break. The IBIS for example. It is a nice feature, but probably the first thing to break.

 

[JordanCS13]

In the dark I can see with an OVF what I could also see with my own eyes and my eyes adapt to the dark quite well. The exposure preview actually is a downside of EVFs for me. It means that the image in the viewfinder constantly changes brightness when I pan around. I prefer to let my own eyes adjust the brightness of my view. I think the OVF simulation of cameras like the R3 is made for people like me.

I wish Canon would bring out a 1D X Mark IV with a stacked BSI sensor.

In poor light with a mid-aperture lens, OVFs are massively darker than an EVF. I actually recently did a test with my R5 and my D750, and put the same f/3.5 lens on both cameras (Nikon AI 135mm f/3.5), and took pictures through the viewfinders with my phone - and found the OVF of the D750 was over 7 stops dimmer than my R5's EVF. Here's a picture - left is the R5's EVF. Center is the view from the OVF at the same exposure.....and the right is the OVF with the expsosure adjusted, which was 7 stops different with regards to ISO and shutter speed.

 

[Nemorino]

. I actually recently did a test with my R5 and my D750, and put the same f/3.5 lens on both cameras

Have You ever used a full manual lens like a Laowa 60mm ultra macro stopped down to f/11 at mfd with a DSLR? Unusable! With the R5 I even have magnification.

 

[SNJ Ops]

The 4000 nits are the brightness of the display in the viewfinder. If you enlarge it, it gets darker. A high peak brightness would be wonderful for seeing bright lights in the viewfinder though. It does not look good if highlights are blown out.

I hardly do burst and although my camera has live view, I hardly ever use it either. I hate the idea that the sensor is warmed up even while you are composing, while a DSLR sensor is just powered for a fraction of a second during the exposure. It seem like a waste of sensor time for me, if 99.9% of the time the image from the sensor is just generated to show it in the EVF.

Those cameras focus too much on sport, people and action. If you do not care about those areas of photography, the negatives of a mirrorless camera weigh much more.

I have serious doubts about the durability of mirrorless cameras. Will they really survive ten or twenty years? There is so much new stuff that could break. The IBIS for example. It is a nice feature, but probably the first thing to break.

I recently did some astro photography, having an EVF to review images was vital. Yes I had a back screen to hand but with my EVF being twice the resolution of the LCD I opted for the EVF.

The few times that I did Macro Photography I would have absolutely hated an OVF.

Time will tell on the durability of mirrorless cameras. An IBIS mechanism can fail just like any other component of any other electronic device.

 

[Del Paso]

Have You ever used a full manual lens like a Laowa 60mm ultra macro stopped down to f/11 at mfd with a DSLR? Unusable! With the R5 I even have magnification.

There's no doubt, that for macros, EVFs are better than OVFs. Loupe function, usability of manual macro lenses, sensor focusing etc...
But when confronted with a high-contrast situation, spring forest , for instance, I far prefer OVFs, EVFs, even the very best ones, still offer an unnatural rendition and are hard to "read".
So, there is no winner here, but there are situation -related advantages and disadvantages. Even though, for most landscapes, architecture and general photography, I tend to prefer OVFs. That's why I'm using both systems...

 

[jam05]

If true, one would need a mini-reactor to feed it. The EVF would be power hungry.

micro OLED

 

[Pixel]

How does this help anyone take better pics? It's like bragging about our camera straps are better than theirs!
Ready to hear some relevant specs!

 

[jam05]

If true, one would need a mini-reactor to feed it. The EVF would be power hungry.

Micro OLED

 

[Del Paso]

Have You ever used a full manual lens like a Laowa 60mm ultra macro stopped down to f/11 at mfd with a DSLR? Unusable! With the R5 I even have magnification.

Yes, I did it. Not ideal, even with a mirrorless. EVF viewfinder image is so coarse, that focusing (handheld) becomes a matter of chance, apart from ideal lighting conditions.

 

[Del Paso]

Eat more carrots!

And blueberries!

 

[vladk]

EVFs are a solution in search of a problem. OVFs already had infinite resolution and no delay and no noise even in the dark.

1. OVF does not have infinite resolution. It is a lens, and if lenses had infinite resolution we would all live in heaven
2. It has no delay but is placed after the moving mechanical mirror.
3. It does not introduce noise, yes, but it is dark and hard to use when it is dark outside.

 

[vladk]

I hope it also provides good magnification ratio.