r.p.d.zlr

dj_nme wrote:
[]
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.

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 wrote:
dj_nme wrote:
[]

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.


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

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 wrote:
[]
So what prompted you to replace your A2 so quickly?

It was all documented on newsgroups at the time - poor JPEG conversion in
the camera and a feeling that the LCD viewfinder was insufficiently
flexible.

David

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:21:46 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

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.

Perhaps it's a difference in taste or style, but I find the 188K pixel
EVF in my DMC-FZ8 with diopter correction to be quite good. The
automatic zoom makes it better for manual focusing than many (most?) of
the optical viewfinders I've used, and other than that and composing
(framing) the image, what is there?

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:54:25 +1100, dj_nme wrote
in :

David J Taylor 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.

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.

It actually has zero effect on framing: frame, focus and shoot.

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.

The autofocus in my DMC-FZ8 is very fast, particularly in fast autofocus
mode, contributing to near instant shutter response. To quote Digital
Photography Review on the Panasonic DMC-FZ8, "the actual delay between
pressing the button and the shot being taken is almost instantaneous".
The spec is 0.005 second shutter release time lag (the time between
pressing the button on the camera and the photo being taken).

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

On 12 Feb 2008 10:38:50 GMT, Chris Malcolm wrote
in :

John Navas wrote:

Arguably the best real estate work is virtual walk-through, where
special 360 deg lenses are used; e.g., Kaiden 360 One VR. Review:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/360one_mod3.html

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.

Suggest you get out of cyberspace and talk to actual realtors. Most
real estate photo work is non-critical, and the Kaiden 360 is considered
a hot item.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

John Navas wrote:
[]
Perhaps it's a difference in taste or style, but I find the 188K pixel
EVF in my DMC-FZ8 with diopter correction to be quite good. The
automatic zoom makes it better for manual focusing than many (most?)
of the optical viewfinders I've used, and other than that and
composing (framing) the image, what is there?

I think it's also affected by switching between the Nikon D40 DSLR and the
(only 115K) Panasonic FZ5/FZ20. Whilst it's usable, your first reaction
is "how did I ever manage with the EVF!". I hardly ever use manual
focussing - in fact there isn't MF on the FZ5, so I'm spared the worry.
The best description I could honestly use is "usable".

Cheers,
David

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 22:36:59 +1100, dj_nme
wrote:

Yes and I wasn't very impressed with the EVF in the Konica-Minolta
Dimage A2.

I was, but I didn't expect it to be like an optical finder
and it wasn't.

It really didn't live up to the hype.

Depends on how much of the hype you succumbed to ;-)

The EVF on the A2 wasn't good enough for me to not to immediately
replace it with a Pentax ist-Ds.

I liked it, but by coincidence I also replaced it with a DS.
I've never regretted the change of course but I do still
miss the controls and feature set of the A2.

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.

Shame, it is a camera that deserves much more than that.

--
John Bean

Jürgen Exner wrote:
Well, technically all it takes is a rmgroup, but of course many, many
servers won't honor such a request.

But whenever you split a group into sub-divisions it is customary to retire
the root group, in this case "rec.photo.digital". And any traffic that
doesn't fit into one of the more specific groups goes into the default
*.misc which appears to be missing for the rec.photo.digital.*.


I've never heard of the notion that it is customary to shut down the
root group when creating sub divisions. In any case, the "root" is
rec.photo which also anchors the 'old' film groups.

Unfortunately, what did happen was other interests such as zlr, P&S and
rangefinder were appended to the rfd. As co-founder of rpd.slr-systems,
I was not for that at all, but we went along to prevent vote sabotage.
Unfortunately, that is a reality of forming new NG's under the big 8.

rpd.slr-sys, is a somewhat thriving group. Yes, there is too much
x-posting 'tween here (and/or rpd35mm) to it and this was a recognized
issue at the time. It was hoped that people would ween themselves off
of the older groups over time. Alas, this has not occurred.

Further, with the popularity and quality of a variety of web based,
moderated groups a lot of people have stopped or reduced their use of
usenet groups. Issues like trolls and plain idjiuts bent on screwing up
NG's have contributed. I personally prefer the simple text format of
usenet over the webNG's and blogs, but my own formerly rich
participation has cut. (I took a break from photo NG's back in the late
fall and only recently have participated in the odd thread of interest.

As to "is rpd.slr-systems" a viable group and should ".zlr" be in there?
My answers are yes and hell no.

The whole point of the slr-systems group is the system aspect of the
modular cameras which zlr's, by their nature, are not.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

John Navas wrote:

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 10:17:39 +1100, dj_nme wrote in :



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.



Current resolution works quite well. The manual focus auto-zoom in the EVF in my Panasonic DMC-FZ8 beats an optical viewfinder hands down.

The FZ8 has a better EVF than the Canon S5 and while the Leica lens is better than the Canon the Canon produces better prints up to ISO 400.  Panasonic over processes and causes smearing to lower the noise where Canon does not do that.  Canon also has a swivel LCD and that is a big advantage, especially when doing macro photography.

I do wish that Canon would have upgraded the EVF like Panasonic did.  My second choice is the FZ18.  I like the wider and longer lens and I think that the image quality is not less than the FZ8.