 Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TromboneAl
I may be missing something, but it seems that a digital SLR is really silly.* As if people are used to the good cameras being SLR, so they think that a DSLR would be better.* *If I'm missing something, let me know what it is.
|
Well an SLR means that you are actually looking through the lens in the viewfinder, not through a separate viewfinder window.* What you see (including focus, stopping down for depth of field preview, framing) is what the camera will actually capture.* *That's why an SLR is better - whether digital or not.* I know on my little digital point and shoot I am often frustrated by the fact that it is not SLR, because I can't seen the LCD screen that well (usually because the sun is behind me, which Duhhh! is where you want the sun to be most of the time!), and when I look through the viewfinder it only shows about 80% of the image that the camera will take.*
It's pretty critical to look at what you are shooting through the optics (not just at the LCD image) to ensure tack sharp focus.* Any image on a camera screen even if displayed through the viewfinder is going to be tiny compared to the final high-res image you see on your computer.* I don't know about digital cameras show a high-res enough LCD display to let you do these fine adjustments.* You want minimum interference between the eye and the (expensive) optics.
Besides, the Canon DSLRs don't show you the image in real time - they just show you the image after the fact so that you can evaluate exposure, etc.
For us, the DSLR also replaced our existing film bodies plus gave us an extra 1.3 to 1.6 multiplier in focal length - a real bonus for the wildlife photographer.
Audrey
|