On 2/08/03 3:46 PM, "Alin Flaider" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh well, I hope I won't be forced to resign within the consumer > condition and have to stare at the reconstructed piece of the reality > in the viewfinder. If I need mind blowing simulations with subject > identification based on the previous 1000 shots and a real time > on-screen probability figure of the shot to be a Pulitzer winner, > then I know where to go. Just give me the true optical image of what > my camera gets through the lens. Can you do this for me, Hal? ;o) Well, yes, Alin :-). Actually, I much prefer the optical finder. I guess my point was that, with the advent of digital cameras, certain things could be done electronically which will eliminate a few things in the process and might change the traditional form factors. Traditional SLR could never eliminate the protrusion of the penta prism (or mirror) housing which set the form of SLRs (wysiwyg viewfinder to allow focussing/exposure which has to be flipped away with a bang and shock ;-), well yes, perricle mirror but...). I do not particularly like it, but the Minolta APS S-1 eliminated it by designing the viewfinder sideways which eliminated the bulky penta prism housing but it is still a big bang flipper. A lot of people, including those pros who use DSLRs hold the camera away from viewfinders as they wish to see the exposure conditions in the screen. Sometimes I wonder how they could avoid the blur, but that's the way they are using the camera (not all times, I know). It would be nice if we could have a true optical viewfinder (which necessitates the bulky body by default) which can be easily toggled to EVF by pushing the button while holding the camera etc ;-). I am sure that engineers are fully aware of the conflicting requirements for DSLR and let's see how they can come up with the nice solutions :-). Cheers, Ken
