r.p.d.zlr

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by measekite, Feb 4, 2008.

  1. measekite

    John Bean Guest

    Well, more a case of electrons than straws but I agree with
    your assessment of the discussion :)
     
    John Bean, Feb 11, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. measekite

    John Bean Guest

    I have none. My objection to EVF is that although it's a
    *much* better descriptor than ZLR joe public hasn't a clue
    what TLA means any more than the abysmally inaccurate "ZLR"
    tag. No matter what TLA you or I think is sensible it's
    nonsense unless a camera buyer recognises it and knows the
    kind of camera it's generally describing.

    When I asked a non-photographic friend if he had heard of a
    SLR he said he had, and correctly identified my two SLRs
    from the mess of other cameras. He didn't know what the
    letters "SLR" referred to, but he knew roughly what kind of
    camera it was.

    However he had no idea what either a ZLR or EVF was, or even
    whether it was a camera.
     
    John Bean, Feb 11, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. Oh please. Now you are changing from ludicrous to insane.

    Yes, you can bend the path of electrons. Usually this is done with strong
    magnetic fields like e.g. in a CRT aka your traditional TV.

    Or are you talking about cables and the electrical path in printed circuits
    as "bent"? In that case any electronic device has a bent electrical path.

    jue
     
    Jürgen Exner, Feb 11, 2008
  4. measekite

    dj_nme Guest

    They have EVF, not reflex viewfinders.
    Without a reflex viewfinder, it aint a ZLR camera.
    That is irrelevent.
    Your Pinocchio (the EVF) will never be a real boy (reflex viewfinder),
    no matter how hard you wish is to be.
     
    dj_nme, Feb 11, 2008
  5. measekite

    John Navas Guest

    Your personal rigid definition will never be accepted by us no matter
    how hard you wish is to be.
     
    John Navas, Feb 11, 2008
  6. measekite

    dj_nme Guest

    There are quite a few HMDs (head mounted displays) in the market today
    which have micro LCD 800x600pixel (super VGA) displays.
    It shouldn't be difficult for a manufacturer to use one of these SVGA
    micro LCD panels in a digicam EVF instead of the grainy low-res ones
    used today.
    The problem seems to be that for a simple HMD with no headtracking cost
    somewhere between $1200 and $2000, so I fear that the cost of the high
    resolution micro LCD could push the price point of this hypothetical EVF
    camera well beyond what an entry-level DSLR camera costs these days.
    My suspision is that even SVGA won't be high enough resolution to
    replace an SLR viewfinder and justify the high cost of the this
    hypothetical EVF camera.
     
    dj_nme, Feb 11, 2008
  7. measekite

    John Navas Guest

    Current resolution works quite well. The manual focus auto-zoom in the
    EVF in my Panasonic DMC-FZ8 beats an optical viewfinder hands down.
     
    John Navas, Feb 11, 2008
  8. measekite

    dj_nme Guest

    That's not the point.
    If your going to use a term to describe something, it should be as
    accurate as possible.
    Calling a camera with an EVF a "ZLR camera" is still misleading: as it
    implies that it has a reflex viewfinder, which an EVF demonstrably is not.
    Describing a digital camera with an EVF as a "ZLR camera" is like
    calling this
    <http://www.digitalphotopeople.com/index.php?showtopic=1071> an "SLR
    camera".
     
    dj_nme, Feb 12, 2008
  9. measekite

    John Turco Guest

    Hello, Jürgen:

    True.
    No argument, here. Still, r.p.d continues to enjoy a rather high "signal
    to noise" ratio, despite all the spammers, trollers and other assorted
    troublemakers.


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>
     
    John Turco, Feb 12, 2008
  10. measekite

    John Turco Guest


    Hello, Alfred:

    Google Groups <http://groups.google.com>.


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>
     
    John Turco, Feb 12, 2008
  11. measekite

    John Turco Guest


    Hello, John:

    Not sure about the other models on your list, but, the C875 lacks
    either an EVF or an optical viewfinder; it just has a regular LCD
    panel.

    Regardless, I probably should've said: "This is the only CLASS of
    digicam with an EVF, to begin with." (There are always exceptions
    to every rule, naturally.)


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>
     
    John Turco, Feb 12, 2008
  12. measekite

    John Turco Guest


    Hello, Chris:

    Okay, you're right -- not all EVF-equipped cameras are of the "super
    zoom" variety. Offhand, I should've easily recalled the Kodak P880,
    whose zoom ratio is a modest 5.8x.


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>
     
    John Turco, Feb 12, 2008
  13. Please stop telling me what I do, or do not wish.

    I use a particular tool - camera, computer, workshop tool - because it
    does the job I want. The electronic viewfinder in the cameras I mentioned
    does exactly the job I want, and can be better than the optical viewfinder
    in some circumstances. That is what matters - not what it's called today.
    The names discussion finished several years ago when the new groups were
    founded.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Feb 12, 2008
  14. dj_nme wrote:
    []
    Have you ever actually used a Minolta A2 for a period - 640 x 480
    resolution?

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Feb 12, 2008
  15. But it's an accident of technology that most (maybe all :) of the
    cameras in the originally described class have EVFs as opposed to
    LCDs. As is calling those viewfinders you look through a little lens
    held up to the eye to see EVFs, because an LCD is an EVF too, just as
    the old twin lens reflex cameras you held at waist level and looked
    down on had viewfinders, even though you didn't have to hold the
    camera up to your face and peer through a little lens to see it.

    The problem is that optical SLRs became a hugely successful kind of
    camera. So now that we have completely new digital technology the
    camera makers are scared of upsetting the ingrained purchasing habits
    of the public, and are making their digital cameras much more like
    SLRs than they need to be. In just the same way as when metal
    technology developed to the point where station wagons could be built
    entirely out of metal, car manufacturers bolted bits of wood to the
    sides because they thought the public would be upset by a station
    wagon without bits of wood down the side, regardless of whether they
    were needed or not.

    No doubt arguments raged at the time in the motoring press about
    whether something could be considered a proper station wagon if it
    didn't have bits of wood down the side.
     
    Chris Malcolm, Feb 12, 2008
  16. In the RE photography forums the single lens panorama devices, like
    the Kaiden 360, are generally regarded as being much too low
    resolution for RE work. They are, however, very popular with robots,
    who like being able to see all round without having to have to shuffle
    their bodies round in a circle or have a swivellable head.
     
    Chris Malcolm, Feb 12, 2008
  17. measekite

    dj_nme Guest

    Yes and I wasn't very impressed with the EVF in the Konica-Minolta
    Dimage A2.
    It really didn't live up to the hype.
    The EVF on the A2 wasn't good enough for me to not to immediately
    replace it with a Pentax ist-Ds.

    My Dad isn't a photography nut, so he quite likes using the
    Konica-Minolta Dimage A2 I gave him as a point & shoot and keeps it set
    in AUTO (green) mode and AF-S.
     
    dj_nme, Feb 12, 2008
  18. measekite

    dj_nme Guest

    I only call it as I see it.
    You keep insisting that an EVF is a reflex viewfinder, when it
    demonstrably is not.
    That still doesn't change the fact that an EVF is not a reflex
    viewfinder, no matter how many times you claim it is one.
     
    dj_nme, Feb 12, 2008
  19. dj_nme wrote:
    []
    Unfortunately I also replaced the Minolta A2 after a few days - but not
    that the viewfinder was inadequate. It was surprising just how good 640 x
    480 pixels was, and I suspect that 800 x 600 or 1024 x 768 would be fairly
    close to an optical viewfinder for many purposes. For precision
    focussing, the automatic zoom when the focus ring is twisted (as happens
    on the FZ20 and other cameras) would probably make the resolution quite
    good enough. I do find the "115K pixel" EVFs only just adequate for
    framing, almost useless for anything else.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Feb 12, 2008
  20. measekite

    dj_nme Guest

    But that's the problem I see with an EVF: the ones available are only
    good for framimg a scene and absolutely require the "focus zoom" when
    manual focus is used, which has the downside of screwing up framing of
    the scene.
    I would be intrigued to see an actual 800x600 EVF (or even better at
    1024x768 or higher) used in a digicam, the major "flies in the ointment"
    may be EVF lag and rather slow contrast detection AF (ATM, compared to
    phase detection AF as used in DSLR cameras) for when you can't be
    bothered using manual focus.

    So what prompted you to replace your A2 so quickly?
     
    dj_nme, Feb 12, 2008
    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.