DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?
"Helmsman3" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:46:03 -0800, nospam wrote:
In article , Helmsman3
wrote:
Let us for a moment presume there is a sealed-lens/sensor design that
doesn't
allow in any dust. Takes images in absolute silence. The lens range is a
full
180-degree fish-eye to an extremely long zoom, all with either an
aperture or
sensor ISO high enough to capture even the most difficult of hand-held
situations in any settings. The body is of a titanium shell for extreme
durability. Few moving parts allows operation in deep sub-zero
environments.
Let
us also presume that the electronic viewfinder (LCD and EVF) is high
resolution
enough that its display, feedback, and articulation abilities far exceed
anything that has been implemented so far, optically or otherwise. Lets
also
presume that these P&S camera designers also had the foresight to
include the
options of shooting in the IR and UV portions of the spectrum too. This
of
course is dependent on an EVF system because no optical viewfinder in
the
world
can accomplish this. Oh what the heck, while we're at it throw in high
quality
video and CD quality stereo sound recording too so you don't even need
your
camcorder as an accessory anymore. Why not.
Surprisingly I've already found all of these conditions met in only 2
P&S
cameras (minus the UV capability and a slightly higher resolution EVF)
with
only
2 inexpensive, small, and light-weight adapter lenses.
and which two p&s cameras might those be?
One would think that a resident-troll like yourself with the experience of
any
well-versed arm-chair photographer of your caliber would be able to figure
it
out from the precise clues already supplied for you. Just figure out which
features belong to which two cameras.
Get to work!
You really need to start earning your resident-troll and arm-chair
photographer
pay without someone always handing it to you for free all the time.
In a lot fewer words than those, you could have just answered the question.
|