New Fuji EVF lag is low, at least on the surface

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Jan 23, 2014.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    I'd have to see it in action, but it should accommodate a decent pan speed, maybe.
    All this can be calculated mathematically, much as you can calculate blur by analyzing camera shake, and relating it to sensor size and pixel density.

    EVF: 2.36 million OLED, 0.005s lag

    What I want now is a toggle that would allow a one-button infinitely adjustable enlargement along with the ability to jump back to 1:1 with one push. It would function like a zoom lens.

    On a semi-related subject, the new FF mirrorless Sony's didn't get very good reviews in Dpreview, owing to continued issues with AF and a horrible JPEG engine (don't care personally), but the output from the sensors (RAW) is impressive.
     
    RichA, Jan 23, 2014
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    PAS Guest

    "RichA" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I'd have to see it in action, but it should accommodate a decent pan
    > speed, maybe.
    > All this can be calculated mathematically, much as you can calculate blur
    > by analyzing camera shake, and relating it to sensor size and pixel
    > density.
    >
    > EVF: 2.36 million OLED, 0.005s lag
    >
    > What I want now is a toggle that would allow a one-button infinitely
    > adjustable enlargement along with the ability to jump back to 1:1 with one
    > push. It would function like a zoom lens.
    >
    > On a semi-related subject, the new FF mirrorless Sony's didn't get very
    > good reviews in Dpreview, owing to continued issues with AF and a horrible
    > JPEG engine (don't care personally), but the output from the sensors (RAW)
    > is impressive.


    My optical viewfinders have no lag.
     
    PAS, Jan 24, 2014
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    > >My optical viewfinders have no lag.
    > >

    > That you are aware of.


    there is no lag in an optical viewfinder. whatever you see is the same
    with or without one.

    > Of course there is a lag.


    with evf, yes.

    > The speed of light is not infinite, but
    > clearly this does not matter.


    obviously you can't avoid that.

    > Yet, in response to my earlier post,
    > nospam seemed to think that any lag in an EVF will always be
    > intolerable.


    i never said that. have you been spending too much time with tony?
     
    nospam, Jan 24, 2014
    #3
  4. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    > >> >My optical viewfinders have no lag.
    > >> >
    > >> That you are aware of.

    > >
    > >there is no lag in an optical viewfinder. whatever you see is the same
    > >with or without one.

    >
    > Speed of light is finite.


    nobody said otherwise.

    > >> Of course there is a lag.

    > >
    > >with evf, yes.

    >
    > And with an optical finder.


    nope.

    the lag due to the speed of light is close enough to zero to be
    considered zero. it's nanoseconds.

    you are once again twisting and arguing on inconsequential details.

    the lag is also *identical* with and without an optical finder. there
    is no difference whatsoever.

    that is *not* the case with evf, nor will it ever be. evf will *always*
    have a latency. it may be short enough to not matter in most cases but
    it will matter in some.

    > >> The speed of light is not infinite, but
    > >> clearly this does not matter.

    > >
    > >obviously you can't avoid that.

    >
    > That's why there is a lag.


    not one that anyone can see, not even you.
     
    nospam, Jan 25, 2014
    #4
  5. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    > >the lag due to the speed of light is close enough to zero to be
    > >considered zero. it's nanoseconds.
    > >
    > >you are once again twisting and arguing on inconsequential details.
    > >
    > >the lag is also *identical* with and without an optical finder. there
    > >is no difference whatsoever.
    > >
    > >that is *not* the case with evf, nor will it ever be. evf will *always*
    > >have a latency. it may be short enough to not matter in most cases but
    > >it will matter in some.

    >
    > Now you are slowly coming over to my point of view. There is a lag but
    > eventually it will be possible reduce it to the point where it does
    > not matter. Can we leave it at that?


    i said as much in my first post, which you obviously did not read.

    however, the lag will never be zero and will matter in some cases.
    those will be fewer and fewer as technology improves, but there will
    always be situations where it will matter.
     
    nospam, Jan 25, 2014
    #5
  6. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Eric Stevens
    <> wrote:

    > Eric Stevens
    > Are you saying that there is no limit to the ability of the eye
    > to detect visual interuption? Surely not.
    > ------
    >
    > I never got a response from nospam to my final question but he seems
    > to be carrying on as though he really does believe that if there is a
    > limit it is just below that set by the speed of light.


    the question doesn't even make sense.

    > I note that on the 25th Jan he wrote
    >
    > ".... evf will *always* have a latency. it may be short enough to
    > not matter in most cases but it will matter in some".


    and i said the same thing several days earlier too. in fact, i think my
    very first post in the thread.

    not that you actually read it.
     
    nospam, Jan 25, 2014
    #6
  7. RichA

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Sunday, 26 January 2014 01:29:26 UTC, Eric Stevens wrote:
    > On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 14:01:05 -0500, nospam <>
    >
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > >In article <>, Eric Stevens

    >
    > ><> wrote:

    >
    > >

    >
    > >> Eric Stevens

    >
    > >> Are you saying that there is no limit to the ability of the eye

    >
    > >> to detect visual interuption? Surely not.

    >
    > >> ------

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> I never got a response from nospam to my final question but he seems

    >
    > >> to be carrying on as though he really does believe that if there is a

    >
    > >> limit it is just below that set by the speed of light.

    >
    > >

    >
    > >the question doesn't even make sense.

    >
    > >

    >
    > >> I note that on the 25th Jan he wrote

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> ".... evf will *always* have a latency. it may be short enough to

    >
    > >> not matter in most cases but it will matter in some".

    >
    > >

    >
    > >and i said the same thing several days earlier too. in fact, i think my

    >
    > >very first post in the thread.

    >
    > >

    >
    > >not that you actually read it.

    >
    >
    >
    > You've been saying it and I've been challenging it longer than that.
    >
    >
    >
    > You seem to be saying that EVF will always have a latency i.e. be too
    > slow (as well as other things) to ever supplant through the lens
    > optical viewing.


    That appears to be an optical illusion generated by yourself.
    Note the word 'seem' which you have put you own interpetion on.

    EVF will always have some latency that's currently a fact.



    > I have been challenging that view. I expect that one
    > of these days EVF will be largely indistinguishable from through the
    > lens optical viewing.


    For a significant number of people it already is.

    > You have said there are theoretical reasons why
    > this will not occur but have never explained what they are.
    >
    > --
    >
    >
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    >
    >
    > Eric Stevens
     
    Whisky-dave, Jan 27, 2014
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. zxcvbob

    affordable digicam with the least shutter lag?

    zxcvbob, Nov 28, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,609
    Steve
    Nov 29, 2003
  2. Ed
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    3,619
  3. R.
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    337
    Lin Chung
    Mar 31, 2005
  4. VicTek

    Dark EVF when trying to frame low light shots

    VicTek, Jan 8, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    337
    David Ruether
    Jan 8, 2007
  5. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    518
Loading...

Share This Page