Evolution of the DVC

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by ~~NoMad~~, Sep 29, 2007.

  1. ~~NoMad~~

    ~~NoMad~~ Guest

    Arguments are starting between DSLR and P&S advocates as digital camera
    technology evolves. My hopes are on the DVC (Digital View Camera) as the
    final solution to these arguments.

    Early P & S cameras were considered just toys with their tiny screens and
    minute viewfinders. Now as the view screens get bigger and the sensors get
    better people are starting to see better pictures coming from this crop of
    new cameras. The simple ergonomics of these new P & S cameras is making
    better photographers out of the people that use them. Taking shots with both
    eyes wide open is a definite asset to any photography.

    The DSLR is a dinosaur with its clunky mirror and one-eyed viewfinder.
    Fortunately you can see from the latest crop of DSLR's that they are taking
    their pointers from the P & S crowd and adding Live-View and larger view
    screens.

    The end result of this evolution will be the advent of the DVC which will
    have a large and effective view screen, combined with an excellent CCD. The
    new DVC cameras will mimic the old film view cameras that many true
    professionals still use today.

    NM
     
    ~~NoMad~~, Sep 29, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Ther are two sides in any argument - Mine and the mistaken one.
     
    Carl Neil Ellwood, Sep 29, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. To me, the SLR will not be obsolete until electric viewfinders have
    the same number of pixels or more than the main image chip. Not many
    7 Mp LCD screens around.
     
    Don Stauffer in Minnesota, Sep 30, 2007
    #3
  4. ~~NoMad~~

    ~~NoMad~~ Guest

    It would be interesting to figure out what the effective resolution of an
    eye looking through an SLR viewfinder is. What with all the optics and
    focusing screens in the way, I would suspect it would be quite low.

    NM
     
    ~~NoMad~~, Sep 30, 2007
    #4
  5. ~~NoMad~~

    Ali Guest

    I have shot with SLR's (and compacts) for many years (both film and
    digital). For me, live view on DSLR's would only really be useful when I
    can't get my eye on the optical viewfinder (for example, if there is an
    obstruction in front of you and you need to hold the camera above head
    height). In the past this was more luck than judgment. It could also be
    handy when shooting on a tripod, but to be honest, it wouldn't get me any
    photos I wouldn't get anyway.

    The other benefit is a 100% field of view, but most pro DSLR bodies have
    this through the optical viewfinder and when shooting with DSLR's that only
    have 95% FOV, it is fairly easy to adapt.

    I can see no disadvantages of having large LCD's, but to be honest, I only
    use this when I am in the hotel, plane, etc. with some time to spare and
    scan through the days photos. What really counts is what you see through
    the viewfinder when you take the shot, and for this I want to look through
    an optical viewfinder, not an LCD.
     
    Ali, Sep 30, 2007
    #5
  6. ~~NoMad~~

    Peter Irwin Guest

    I doubt it. The ground glass collar on my old Pentax
    viewfinder screen is sharp enough that a 2x magnifier
    over the eyepiece is genuinely useful. I would
    guess that that means a resolution on the fine
    ground-glass portion of the screen of better
    than 1 line pair per minute of arc.

    The viewfinder is around 20 degrees by 30 degrees,
    so a whole screen with 2 pixels per minute of arc would
    have to be over 8 megapixels.

    That being said, an 8 megapixel EVF would be in
    many ways better than an optical system. The
    really sharp area would not be confined to
    a doughnut shape at the centre of the screen,
    and it could be as bright as you like.

    Peter.
     
    Peter Irwin, Sep 30, 2007
    #6
  7. [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    Don Stauffer in Minnesota
    As experience shows, a VGA (640x480x3) eVF with an "instant on-demand"
    2x or 4x magnification (as on A2) is getting close in usability to an
    honest optical viewfinder. Given this, I expect that about 1200x800x3
    eVF would be much better than an optical viewfinder.

    (And, honestly speaking, I would gladly reject the "tunnel"
    viewfinder at all, if there were an alternative way to stabilize
    the camera - I hate screwing the camera into my eyesocket.)

    Hope this helps,
    Ilya
     
    Ilya Zakharevich, Oct 1, 2007
    #7
  8. ~~NoMad~~

    Bill Tuthill Guest

    You mean Minolta Dimage A2? Interesting comment.
    As it turns out, holding a digicam at arms length and looking at
    the LCD viewfinder works just as well (for stability) as putting the
    viewfinder next to your face, perhaps because arm-holding eliminates
    shake from breathing.
     
    Bill Tuthill, Oct 1, 2007
    #8
  9. [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    Bill Tuthill
    Actually, I lost the count. It might have been this, otherwise it is
    Konica Minolta Dimage A2. ;-)
    I find it hard to believe such blanket statements. This MUST depend
    on the design of the grips, weight of the camera, physical length of
    the lens, on focal length, exposure time, presence of stabilization
    etc...

    Yours,
    Ilya
     
    Ilya Zakharevich, Oct 2, 2007
    #9
  10. ~~NoMad~~

    Bill Tuthill Guest

    There was a test on this, which I will endeavor to find...

    Here it is:
    http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=17501274
     
    Bill Tuthill, Oct 2, 2007
    #10
  11. ... which includes:

    "What I think is happening is that the classic SLR braced position is
    slightly more stable than the two hands held out in front. This is most
    clearly indicated by the slowest shutter speed results where the E-300
    seems better. But the C7070 has an advantage in that it does not have
    vibrations induced by a flipping mirror. And I suspect this is why it
    gives us such nice undistorted dots at 1/60 of a second compared to the
    not quite perfect dots from the E-300 at the same shutter speed."

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Oct 2, 2007
    #11
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.