What would the life expectancy (working without problems) of a digital
camera be today.
From my own experience with previous cameras it appears that 30 months of
good usage is about the best duration.
That's why I am reluctant to spent over $500.00 for a camera. What do you
think?

"Celcius" wrote in message
...

"JC Dill" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 18:47:53 -0500, "Celcius"
wrote:

A DSLR doesn't use the LCD. Period.

It doesn't now, but that doesn't mean it never will.

Let's get over it and forge ahead!

It sounds like YOU need to "get over it". I'm just mentioning some
valid uses for the feature if it ever gets implemented. Sheesh

jc

--

"The nice thing about a mare is you get to ride a lot
of different horses without having to own that many."
~ Eileen Morgan of The Mare's Nest, PA


JC,
Sorry for being abrupt (I got over it) ;-)
What I find is the fact that most of the time, with a camera that uses an
LCD, reflection, light, the sun, whatever... get in the way. My second
camera was a Canon Pro1. It could use the LCD, it was also "twistable",
but I constantly used the viewfinder which was very clear and, according
to Canon, covered 100% of the scene. It also had "spot metering", ISO down
to 50, 2.0" TFT, 235,000 pixels LCD, 8MP, etc. :
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonpro1/page2.asp
perhaps the closest to the description the OP made.
That camera had a major flaw however: When it was new, after using it for
50 or so shots, the lens froze up on me. Henry's gave me a new one. Less
than a year later, when I was on a trip to Greece, it did it again. When I
came back, Canon repaired it on warranty, but I elected to trade it in for
a Canon 350D.
Take care, and sorry again.
Marcel