["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems.]
2Bdecided wrote:
On 18 Jan, 13:09, "Allowa" . wrote:

No point and shoot will compare to a dslr for picture quality but they are
big and if that doesn't suit then there are plenty of alternatives. The link
below will give you everything about canon you want to know.http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...ad.php?t=42034

Thanks, fascinating. Lots to read!

P.s. The viewfinder is better for getting sharp pictures

Even if I don't plan to focus them myself?

A viewfinder has no lag. A monitor has the read sensor-interpret-
convert-display cycle, which you'll see if you turn with the
camera: the monitor lags behind.

AF is also faster and more accurate if you do not have to flip up
the mirror (there are a very few cameras that have a secondary
sensor for life view), because for AF you either have to flip
down the mirror again or you have to use contrast based AF
(compact camera type) instead of phase shift AF (SLR type).

The viewfinder also works when any monitor will only show grain
and noise due to a lack of light.

-Wolfgang