Current digital cameras

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by James Silverton, Sep 18, 2009.

  1. Hello All!

    I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I
    note that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are
    neither DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually
    work in bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately, there
    is no optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on my Nikon
    that I bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho' it does
    have an optical finder.


    --


    James Silverton
    Potomac, Maryland

    Email, with obvious alterations:
    not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
     
    James Silverton, Sep 18, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. James Silverton

    Charles Guest

    "James Silverton" <> wrote in message
    news:h90upm$n83$-september.org...
    > Hello All!
    >
    > I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I note
    > that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are neither
    > DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually work in
    > bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately, there is no
    > optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on my Nikon that I
    > bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho' it does have an
    > optical finder.


    LCDs are getting better, but only marginally. Bright sunlight is a bear!
     
    Charles, Sep 18, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. James Silverton

    Shawn Hirn Guest

    In article <h90upm$n83$-september.org>,
    "James Silverton" <> wrote:

    > Hello All!
    >
    > I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I
    > note that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are
    > neither DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually
    > work in bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately, there
    > is no optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on my Nikon
    > that I bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho' it does
    > have an optical finder.


    Some do, some don't. You can check out digital camera reviews at
    http://www.dpreview.com
     
    Shawn Hirn, Sep 18, 2009
    #3
  4. James Silverton

    ray Guest

    On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 17:41:12 -0400, James Silverton wrote:

    > Hello All!
    >
    > I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I
    > note that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are
    > neither DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually
    > work in bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately, there
    > is no optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on my Nikon
    > that I bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho' it does
    > have an optical finder.


    The third option, of course, is an Electronic View Finder. Personally,
    I'd never have a camera without a viewfinder. In fact, I have no use for
    the back panel LCD - throw it out.
     
    ray, Sep 19, 2009
    #4
  5. James Silverton

    SMS Guest

    James Silverton wrote:
    > Hello All!
    >
    > I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I
    > note that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are
    > neither DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually
    > work in bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately, there
    > is no optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on my Nikon
    > that I bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho' it does
    > have an optical finder.


    _Never_ buy a camera without an optical, or at the very least, an
    electronic, viewfinder.
     
    SMS, Sep 19, 2009
    #5
  6. On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 17:41:12 -0400, James Silverton wrote:

    > Hello All!
    >
    > I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I
    > note that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are
    > neither DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually
    > work in bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately, there
    > is no optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on my Nikon
    > that I bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho' it does
    > have an optical finder.


    On compacts, I prefer using the LCD. In any condition, they're much
    better than the crappy optical finders on these models.

    I don't consider bright sunlight to be that much of a problem. In most
    situations, I can leave the LCD of my Powershot S80 at its lowest
    brightness setting. And don't forget that bright sunlight usually isn't
    the best light for pphotography anyway.

    --
    Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com
     
    Robert Spanjaard, Sep 19, 2009
    #6
  7. James Silverton

    Don Stauffer Guest

    James Silverton wrote:
    > Hello All!
    >
    > I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I
    > note that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are
    > neither DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually
    > work in bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately, there
    > is no optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on my Nikon
    > that I bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho' it does
    > have an optical finder.
    >
    >

    In addition to the contrast ratio in bright light, there is the
    resolution problem if manually focusing. You have a camera with maybe
    ten or twelve pixels, and are trying to judge the focus on a display
    with a few hundred thousand pixels. Difficult. If you NEVER use manual
    focus it is okay, but if you want a camera with a manual focus option
    you must have an optical viewfinder.
     
    Don Stauffer, Sep 19, 2009
    #7
  8. On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 08:27:39 -0500, Don Stauffer <>
    wrote:

    >James Silverton wrote:
    >> Hello All!
    >>
    >> I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I
    >> note that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are
    >> neither DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually
    >> work in bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately, there
    >> is no optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on my Nikon
    >> that I bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho' it does
    >> have an optical finder.
    >>
    >>

    >In addition to the contrast ratio in bright light, there is the
    >resolution problem if manually focusing. You have a camera with maybe
    >ten or twelve pixels, and are trying to judge the focus on a display
    >with a few hundred thousand pixels. Difficult. If you NEVER use manual
    >focus it is okay, but if you want a camera with a manual focus option
    >you must have an optical viewfinder.


    Totally false.

    I find I get even sharper manual focus using an EVF the correct way than
    can ever be done by using an optical viewfinder. I have a whole collection
    of various interchangeable (and expensive) focusing screens for my SLR
    cameras and there's no comparison to the accuracy you can get with a good
    EVF. Not to mention the extra brightness you get in low-light conditions
    that would make all optical viewfinders completely useless. You just have
    to learn to use new tools in the proper way. This is something that is
    beyond the minds and lack of talents of those mired in last century
    mechanical technology.
     
    Charles Atwater, Sep 19, 2009
    #8
  9. James Silverton

    ray Guest

    On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 10:54:09 -0500, Charles Atwater wrote:

    > On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 08:27:39 -0500, Don Stauffer <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>James Silverton wrote:
    >>> Hello All!
    >>>
    >>> I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I
    >>> note that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are
    >>> neither DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually
    >>> work in bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately,
    >>> there is no optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on
    >>> my Nikon that I bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho'
    >>> it does have an optical finder.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>In addition to the contrast ratio in bright light, there is the
    >>resolution problem if manually focusing. You have a camera with maybe
    >>ten or twelve pixels, and are trying to judge the focus on a display
    >>with a few hundred thousand pixels. Difficult. If you NEVER use manual
    >>focus it is okay, but if you want a camera with a manual focus option
    >>you must have an optical viewfinder.

    >
    > Totally false.
    >
    > I find I get even sharper manual focus using an EVF the correct way than
    > can ever be done by using an optical viewfinder. I have a whole
    > collection of various interchangeable (and expensive) focusing screens
    > for my SLR cameras and there's no comparison to the accuracy you can get
    > with a good EVF. Not to mention the extra brightness you get in
    > low-light conditions that would make all optical viewfinders completely
    > useless. You just have to learn to use new tools in the proper way. This
    > is something that is beyond the minds and lack of talents of those mired
    > in last century mechanical technology.


    The kicker there is getting a decent EVF. I've not checked out the crop
    recently, but last time I looked most were so blocky it would be
    difficult for me to use them for anything. Seems if they're 300k or more
    then it works fine.
     
    ray, Sep 19, 2009
    #9
  10. James Silverton

    Miles Bader Guest

    ray <> writes:
    > The kicker there is getting a decent EVF. I've not checked out the crop
    > recently, but last time I looked most were so blocky it would be
    > difficult for me to use them for anything. Seems if they're 300k or more
    > then it works fine.


    There are more issues than just resolution though; in particular, even
    when you're taking "still" pictures, a laggy VF feels very weird...

    -Miles

    --
    Virtues, n. pl. Certain abstentions.
     
    Miles Bader, Sep 19, 2009
    #10
  11. James Silverton

    ray Guest

    On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 01:23:51 +0900, Miles Bader wrote:

    > ray <> writes:
    >> The kicker there is getting a decent EVF. I've not checked out the crop
    >> recently, but last time I looked most were so blocky it would be
    >> difficult for me to use them for anything. Seems if they're 300k or
    >> more then it works fine.

    >
    > There are more issues than just resolution though; in particular, even
    > when you're taking "still" pictures, a laggy VF feels very weird...
    >
    > -Miles


    Interesting comment. I've been using my Kodak P850 for a couple of years
    now and I never experienced that.
     
    ray, Sep 19, 2009
    #11
  12. On 19 Sep 2009 16:41:44 GMT, ray <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 01:23:51 +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
    >
    >> ray <> writes:
    >>> The kicker there is getting a decent EVF. I've not checked out the crop
    >>> recently, but last time I looked most were so blocky it would be
    >>> difficult for me to use them for anything. Seems if they're 300k or
    >>> more then it works fine.

    >>
    >> There are more issues than just resolution though; in particular, even
    >> when you're taking "still" pictures, a laggy VF feels very weird...
    >>
    >> -Miles

    >
    >Interesting comment. I've been using my Kodak P850 for a couple of years
    >now and I never experienced that.


    That's because these people, who are still living in the dark-ages using
    optical viewfinders, can't comprehend the fact that the EVF is relaying the
    shutter-speed too. The most they ever do is test these cameras in poorly
    lit store corners on auto-mode, never realizing that a 1/4th-1/8th second
    shutter speed is being delivered visually to their eye. They ignorantly
    think this is some kind of fault. I find this supposed "lag" to be of huge
    benefit. An instant shutter-speed preview that is of even greater benefit
    than a DOF preview. The DOF preview in an EVF which is also delivered to
    the eye in full brightness, but is nearly useless in an optical viewfinder
    because when stopping down your lens you can no longer see the image to
    judge the DOF, catch-22. This shutter-speed preview "lag" instantly lets me
    know when the water's rapids are blurred enough. I instantly know if the
    hummingbird's wings are going to be captured in crisp outlines. All being
    delivered to my eye in real-time preview the very same way that they will
    be captured to the final image.

    They'll catch on one day. About a decade and a half after everyone else has
    already come to understand and appreciate these things. They're not too
    quick. They've proved that they suffer from "brain lag". Then again, most
    of them that keep spouting this nonsense have never even held a camera.
    They're just trolls that re-spew what they've read other equally ignorant
    trolls spew in the past.
     
    Charles Atwater, Sep 19, 2009
    #12
  13. James Silverton

    Bigguy Guest

    James Silverton wrote:
    > Hello All!
    >
    > I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I
    > note that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are
    > neither DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually
    > work in bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately, there
    > is no optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on my Nikon
    > that I bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho' it does
    > have an optical finder.
    >
    >

    Depends on usage I guess...

    LCD and OLED screens are improving all the time.

    I use a Panasonic LX3 as a backup / substitute for my DSLR.

    I've never been unable to use the LCD due to bright sunlight.
    I've never missed having a viewfinder on the LX3.

    Manual focussing (on the LX3) is done with a magnified section on the
    LCD and works fine - even for 'macro'.
    It's far better than any EVF I've used.

    I use the LX3 more and more for social gatherings etc. - it's far easier
    to get good candid shots than with the intrusive DSLR.

    I take the LX3 with me a lot - first rule of photography is to actually
    have a camera with you ;-)

    DSLR still gets used for more serious (paying) work.

    Guy
     
    Bigguy, Sep 20, 2009
    #13
  14. James Silverton

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 08:27:39 -0500, Don Stauffer <>
    wrote:
    : James Silverton wrote:
    : > Hello All!
    : >
    : > I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I
    : > note that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are
    : > neither DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually
    : > work in bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately,
    : > there is no optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on
    : > my Nikon that I bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho'
    : > it does have an optical finder.
    : >
    : >
    : In addition to the contrast ratio in bright light, there is the
    : resolution problem if manually focusing. You have a camera with maybe
    : ten or twelve pixels, and are trying to judge the focus on a display
    : with a few hundred thousand pixels. Difficult. If you NEVER use manual
    : focus it is okay, but if you want a camera with a manual focus option
    : you must have an optical viewfinder.

    If the camera has only ten or twelve pixels, both the viewfinder and the
    focusing mechanism are irrelevant. ;^)

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Sep 20, 2009
    #14
  15. Charles Atwater <> wrote:

    > That's because these people, who are still living in the dark-ages using
    > optical viewfinders,


    Ah, yes, the P&S troll.

    > can't comprehend the fact that the EVF is relaying the
    > shutter-speed too.


    .... is very slow because it cannot gather enough light.

    > The most they ever do is test these cameras in poorly
    > lit store corners on auto-mode, never realizing that a 1/4th-1/8th second
    > shutter speed is being delivered visually to their eye.


    Good point: If the camera seems laggy, don't shoot in first place.
    Try critical focussing with 1/4s shutter speed and hand-holding:
    everything smears. The handful of pixels in an EVF doesn't
    matter because of that.

    > They ignorantly
    > think this is some kind of fault. I find this supposed "lag" to be of huge
    > benefit. An instant shutter-speed preview that is of even greater benefit
    > than a DOF preview.


    It works especially well when one is going to freeze the scene with
    flash, as all flashes take 1/4th to 1/8th of a second. And it can
    be easily adjusted: just turn up the lights or wait till daytime.

    > The DOF preview in an EVF which is also delivered to
    > the eye in full brightness,


    .... but is only workable on a tripod, handheld everything
    smears to streaks ...

    > but is nearly useless in an optical viewfinder
    > because when stopping down your lens you can no longer see the image to
    > judge the DOF, catch-22.


    Fancy that. I must have magical hands for I can see the
    image very well with DOF preview using optical viewfinders.

    > This shutter-speed preview "lag" instantly lets me
    > know when the water's rapids are blurred enough.


    Suuure.

    > I instantly know if the
    > hummingbird's wings are going to be captured in crisp outlines.


    You never ever saw a hummingbird through an EVF.

    > All being
    > delivered to my eye in real-time preview the very same way that they will
    > be captured to the final image.


    Especially as you use flash with hummingbirds, the constant
    flashing will irritate the hummingbird and melt the flashes.

    > They'll catch on one day. About a decade and a half after everyone else has
    > already come to understand and appreciate these things. They're not too
    > quick. They've proved that they suffer from "brain lag". Then again, most
    > of them that keep spouting this nonsense have never even held a camera.
    > They're just trolls that re-spew what they've read other equally ignorant
    > trolls spew in the past.


    Yep, it's the stupid P&S troll.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 20, 2009
    #15
  16. James Silverton

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 10:54:09 -0500, Charles Atwater <>
    wrote:
    : On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 08:27:39 -0500, Don Stauffer <>
    : wrote:
    :
    : >James Silverton wrote:
    : >> Hello All!
    : >>
    : >> I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I
    : >> note that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are
    : >> neither DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually
    : >> work in bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately, there
    : >> is no optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on my Nikon
    : >> that I bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho' it does
    : >> have an optical finder.
    : >>
    : >>
    : >In addition to the contrast ratio in bright light, there is the
    : >resolution problem if manually focusing. You have a camera with maybe
    : >ten or twelve pixels, and are trying to judge the focus on a display
    : >with a few hundred thousand pixels. Difficult. If you NEVER use manual
    : >focus it is okay, but if you want a camera with a manual focus option
    : >you must have an optical viewfinder.
    :
    : Totally false.
    :
    : I find I get even sharper manual focus using an EVF the correct way than
    : can ever be done by using an optical viewfinder. I have a whole collection
    : of various interchangeable (and expensive) focusing screens for my SLR
    : cameras and there's no comparison to the accuracy you can get with a good
    : EVF. Not to mention the extra brightness you get in low-light conditions
    : that would make all optical viewfinders completely useless. You just have
    : to learn to use new tools in the proper way. This is something that is
    : beyond the minds and lack of talents of those mired in last century
    : mechanical technology.

    And just what would "the correct way" be? Inquiring minds want to know.

    Sorry to call your bluff, sirrah; but life can be a bitch, even for trolls.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Sep 20, 2009
    #16
  17. Mark F <> wrote:
    > On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 08:27:39 -0500, Don Stauffer
    >> James Silverton wrote:


    > I don't trust mirror finders - I had a Pentax ES I or ES II that
    > somehow got the stop for the mirror bent. This had the effect of


    "I don't trust EVFs. I once saw a camera that had a broken EVF,
    it was all black. Instead of having it fixed I concluded all
    EVFs must be bad."

    > If you can get to see what the sensor sees that is what you should
    > use.


    This excludes an EVF, as you don't see what the sensor sees, but
    an extremely downscaled, edited and processed version with some
    arbitrarily chosen integration time of what the sensor had seen
    some time ago --- all the while burning battery power without
    actually capturing a frame.

    > And with any likely technology you have to have some type of
    > a light shield around the display screen that you are viewing as long
    > as you can't make a screen brighter than daylight by a factor of at
    > least 10. (You don't need that bright to focus, but you do in order
    > to judge the image.)


    You can use e.g. transflexive displays. No need for a light
    shield.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 20, 2009
    #17
  18. James Silverton

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 09:54:40 +0100, Bigguy <> wrote:
    : James Silverton wrote:
    : > Hello All!
    : >
    : > I have been away from discussions of the latest digital cameras and I
    : > note that there are a number of attractive appearing models that are
    : > neither DSLRs nor possess an optical finder. Do the monitors actually
    : > work in bright sunlight? I keep seeing the phrase "unfortunately, there
    : > is no optical finder" in the magazines. I know that the LCD on my Nikon
    : > that I bought 5 years ago is useless in bright sunlight tho' it does
    : > have an optical finder.
    : >
    : >
    : Depends on usage I guess...
    :
    : LCD and OLED screens are improving all the time.
    :
    : I use a Panasonic LX3 as a backup / substitute for my DSLR.
    :
    : I've never been unable to use the LCD due to bright sunlight.
    : I've never missed having a viewfinder on the LX3.
    :
    : Manual focussing (on the LX3) is done with a magnified section on the
    : LCD and works fine - even for 'macro'.
    : It's far better than any EVF I've used.
    :
    : I use the LX3 more and more for social gatherings etc. - it's far easier
    : to get good candid shots than with the intrusive DSLR.

    At the risk of going OT, let's explore that a little. I wonder if most of the
    intrusivity of a DSLR isn't in the mind of the photographer. I do a fair
    amount of event photography, and I don't have a lot of trouble getting candid
    shots. People are so used to seeing cameras around that they often just ignore
    them. I suppose that might not be the case if the camera is very large or
    strange looking, but mine aren't.

    : I take the LX3 with me a lot - first rule of photography is to actually
    : have a camera with you ;-)

    That, of course, is the real win for a P&S.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Sep 20, 2009
    #18
  19. Robert wrote on Sun, 20 Sep 2009 08:22:41 -0400:

    > At the risk of going OT, let's explore that a little. I wonder
    > if most of the intrusivity of a DSLR isn't in the mind of the
    > photographer. I do a fair amount of event photography, and I
    > don't have a lot of trouble getting candid shots. People are
    > so used to seeing cameras around that they often just ignore
    > them. I suppose that might not be the case if the camera is
    > very large or strange looking, but mine aren't.


    > : I take the LX3 with me a lot - first rule of photography is
    > to actually : have a camera with you ;-)


    > That, of course, is the real win for a P&S.


    I might add to my original question, I do not want a monstrous DSLR. My
    aim is for a camera that I can put in my pocket if I wish. The Canon D10
    is about the outside limit for me in size and weight.

    --

    James Silverton
    Potomac, Maryland

    Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
     
    James Silverton, Sep 20, 2009
    #19
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Unclaimed Mysteries

    Are current prosumer digital cameras squant-enabled?

    Unclaimed Mysteries, Jul 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    1,441
    Prime
    Jul 22, 2003
  2. Iconoclast

    Current draw of digital cameras

    Iconoclast, Dec 20, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,053
    Ken Weitzel
    Dec 20, 2003
  3. zxcvar
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    940
    (Pete Cresswell)
    Jan 4, 2004
  4. wagwheel

    Cameras--Cameras--Cameras

    wagwheel, Mar 31, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    480
    Mark B.
    Apr 1, 2007
  5. wagwheel

    Cameras--Cameras--Cameras

    wagwheel, Apr 1, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    459
    Ken Lucke
    Apr 1, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page