In fairness, the eye/brain already have a 100ms delay; adding another 50ms (the current EVF best, I believe) is probably tolerable for most purposes. Also, if it's 50ms now, in "a few years" (I've given up predicting) it'll be low enough that it's not really noticeable.neuroanatomist said:Who cares if it's a few milliseconds behind the real world. Who cares if it's not the actual exposure because an EVF is showing an 8-bit jpg'd version of the world and I'm capturing a RAW image.douglaurent said:Now THESE are really things that the whole world is waiting and asking for! Congrats! Much more important than seeing the actual exposure in the viewfinder or a dedicated ISO wheel!
Along those same lines, the fact that the current EVFs are limited to standardized 8-bit images does not mean it will always be so. A fully mature EVF will be configurable to meet the photographers needs; i.e., set your own curve.
I agree that EVF is not a full match for OVF, but it's getting there, and it's close enough that we can say that there's no essential quality of EVF that will prevent it from reaching the level of "fully adequate."