Yes, but AG was writing about DSLRs having an EVF. But more to the
point: if a camera has to have an EVF I won't buy or use that sort of
camera. It removes me from the photographing process by too much.
Chris
On 5 Nov 2004, at 19:04, Winsor Crosby wrote:
>
> I mostly cannot see any image on the one on the outside during normal
> daylight hours outside when I take most of my pictures. An EVF is not
> pretty, but its framing is accurate and because it is inside the camera
> you can see it. Of course a DSLR is the way to go for a better
> viewfinder.
>
>
>
> Winsor
> Long Beach, California, USA
> On Nov 5, 2004, at 2:50 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
>
>>
>>> .
>>>
>>>> suspect that further development of the EVF will be the
>>>> solution for
>>>> small sensor DSLRs, as the pentaprism was for 35mm SLRs.
>>>
>>> Having used the EVF in the A1 since March, I'd have to agree. I
>>> have a love/hate relationship with the EVF, but feel that with
>>> higher resolution, higher bit-depth and lower delay (actual
>>> real-time display), that EVFs are the future for most DSLRs.
>>> It'll probably be five years before Canon introduces the 90D
>>> Mark IV with an EVF and 175 frames per second with 120MP
>>> sensors. (Olympus will still be selling the E-1)
>>>
>>> AG
<|_:-)_|>
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
+44 (0)7092 251126
http://www.threeshoes.co.uk
http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|