Nails in P&S coffins (and DSLRs?)

On Wed, 04 Mar 2009 06:07:14 +0000, Bruce wrote:

ray wrote:

Just out of curiosity, have you ever looked at a Kodak P series?


I can't imagine ever wanting to use a Kodak digicam, so no.

If you could ever lower yourself, you might find that the 330k EVF in the
Kodaks is quite useable.




I find
the EVF on it to be quite usable - has about three times the pixels of
the lesser ones.

In rec.photo.digital Rich wrote:

| Samsung announces "DX" sized sensor camera with NO MIRROR!
|
| http://www.dpreview.com/news/0903/09...stem.asp#specs

Why was this originally crossposted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems? It is
not an SLR. I deleted that newsgroup from my followup.

I'll be interested when a truly pro model comes out with a full line of lenses.
As discussed in other threads a while back, it would be possible to make this
kind of camera work compatibly with an SLR system. It will need either a leaf
shutter in the lens (preferred) or a focal plane shutter. A hybrid system with
leaf shutters in most or all lenses could have camera bodies with optical view
(e.g. SLR, or classic rangefiner) or digital view (LCD, either on the back on
in the viewfinder, or even both). Focal plane shutters would be possible, but
with digital sensors, there is less need for that (film cameras needed a focal
plane shutter in SLRs).

While having the option for lightweight consumer grade cameras is good, for the
more intense photography, a serious camera, with at least enough size to hold
on to effectively, is desired. Having them use the same lens mount would be a
plus.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

In rec.photo.digital Ron Recer wrote:

| "Rich" wrote in message
| ...
| Samsung announces "DX" sized sensor camera with NO MIRROR!
|
| http://www.dpreview.com/news/0903/09...stem.asp#specs
|
| Might be fine for some folks, but I would hate to try and hold it steady
| while I looked at the LCD to frame a photo using a 300mm or 400mm lens. Of
| course you could always use a tripod, but I would think that would be more
| awkward to carry around than a camera with a mirror box. g

There is a viewfinder on it. You can see it in the picture. If it has no
mirror, what would you see through there? I do not see a rangefinder opening
on the front. How about a 2nd LCD inside that is optically mated with the
viewfinder?

I want to find the JTAG port.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

In rec.photo.digital Alfred Molon wrote:
| In article , Rich says...
| Samsung announces "DX" sized sensor camera with NO MIRROR!
|
| http://www.dpreview.com/news/0903/09...stem.asp#specs
|
| Does it take interchangeable lenses and if so what lens mount does it
| use? Is it perhaps compatible with the micro 4/3 standard?

Article says APS-C sensor. That's larger than 4/3. That means better than 4/3.
That means not as good as full frame. OTOH, many cameras do reasonably well in
APS-C size.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

In rec.photo.digital ray wrote:
| On Mon, 02 Mar 2009 22:52:04 -0800, Savageduck wrote:
|
| On 2009-03-02 20:26:36 -0800, ray said:
|
| On Mon, 02 Mar 2009 14:40:15 -0600, Rich wrote:
|
| Samsung announces "DX" sized sensor camera with NO MIRROR!
|
| http://www.dpreview.com/news/0903/09...stem.asp#specs
|
| Geez! What will they think of next!! A digital camera with an
| Electronic ViewFinder!!! Absolutely REVOLUTIONARY!!!!!
|
| CoolPix 5700 redux
|
| For one thing - I see no information on the resolution of the EVF. That
| has been the downfall of many an EVF, IMHO. Most of them are of such low
| resolution that the image is far too 'blocky' to do any decent
| photography - I think, typically, they are around 100k - 300k or more
| seems to be adequate.

If it includes an electronic zoom just for viewing, which lots of cameras
do already have in some form for viewing from the back LCD, then it can be
a reasonably convenient way to verify the focus was on the right part of
the scene, or for manual focusing (don't know if this camera can do that).
For more critical work, you would be on a tripod, using the back LCD, and
probably not this camera.

No LCD is going to have the resolution of the sensor without being a monster
in size (think of hauling around a big 42" widescreen TV with computer display
pixel size). If you want to see individual sensor pixels while composing, you
will need the zoom.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

In article , David J
Taylor says...

The Panasonic G1 has about 1.4MP viewfinder (so Minolta might have called
it 4.2M G) and I can't wait to see what it actually looks like in
practice.

Isn't it 800x600 full colour pixels, i.e. 0.48MP?
--

Alfred Molon
http://www.molon.de - Photos of Asia, Africa and Europe

In rec.photo.digital Bruce wrote:

| OK, thanks. I haven't seen a good EVF yet. I don't expect that the
| Samsung will have one.

By the time Canon and Nikon release professional versions of this camera style,
I suspect the EVF designs will be better and more usable for the kinds of uses
that need viewfinder composing. I don't think it needs to actually have as
much resolution in the EVF as in the back. Neither needs as much as the sensor
itself. There needs to be a convenient button for zooming the view for focus
confirmation/setting. A contrast enhancer on the view could also assist the
focusing effort.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

In rec.photo.digital MG wrote:
|
| "Rich" wrote in message
| ...
| Samsung announces "DX" sized sensor camera with NO MIRROR!
|
| http://www.dpreview.com/news/0903/09...stem.asp#specs
|
|
| Why did they only half way?
|
| They should go all the way and shape it like a digicam. With a LCD that
| flips out to the side, and the EVF at the back.

For people that like that style, yes, they should make a version like that.
I, for one, do not want it.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

On Wed, 04 Mar 2009 19:12:25 +0000, phil-news-nospam wrote:

In rec.photo.digital ray wrote: | On Mon, 02 Mar 2009
22:52:04 -0800, Savageduck wrote: |
| On 2009-03-02 20:26:36 -0800, ray said: |
| On Mon, 02 Mar 2009 14:40:15 -0600, Rich wrote: |
| Samsung announces "DX" sized sensor camera with NO MIRROR! |
| http://www.dpreview.com/news/0903/09...stem.asp#specs
|
| Geez! What will they think of next!! A digital camera with an |
Electronic ViewFinder!!! Absolutely REVOLUTIONARY!!!!! |
| CoolPix 5700 redux
|
| For one thing - I see no information on the resolution of the EVF.
That | has been the downfall of many an EVF, IMHO. Most of them are of
such low | resolution that the image is far too 'blocky' to do any
decent | photography - I think, typically, they are around 100k - 300k
or more | seems to be adequate.

If it includes an electronic zoom just for viewing, which lots of
cameras do already have in some form for viewing from the back LCD, then
it can be a reasonably convenient way to verify the focus was on the
right part of the scene, or for manual focusing (don't know if this
camera can do that). For more critical work, you would be on a tripod,
using the back LCD, and probably not this camera.

No LCD is going to have the resolution of the sensor without being a
monster in size (think of hauling around a big 42" widescreen TV with
computer display pixel size). If you want to see individual sensor
pixels while composing, you will need the zoom.

I'm not expecting the EVF to have the full resolution of the sensor. I'm
hoping for something I can use. I've looked at a number of EVF cameras -
my assessment, for my use - YMMV - is that I can't stand an EVF of 110k
pixels while one with 330k is perfectly acceptable. I don't need or want
to see individual pixels while composing - I don't see that it would be
useful. I also don't want a stinking LCD on the back of the camera -
again YMMV and most seem to come that way anyhow.

Ron Hunter wrote:
Bruce wrote:
ray wrote:
Just out of curiosity, have you ever looked at a Kodak P series?


I can't imagine ever wanting to use a Kodak digicam, so no.


I find
the EVF on it to be quite usable - has about three times the pixels of
the lesser ones.


Such bias is irrational, and can be expensive. Especially with
accompanied by ignorance of the features of the other brand.
But, it's your money.


Buying junk is irrational and always expensive, because you end up
paying once for junk and a second time for the equipment that you should
have bought in the first place.

Some of us buy junk, learn from it, and try hard never to do it again.

Others buy junk and are happy with it. Go figure.