If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Does anybody have an answer?
"sambarluc" wrote in message ... Reading all the mess about DP2, and expectations on Olympus, and the dissatisfaction of many (or at least me) with the building philosophy of present day digital cameras, I came up with a thought. Camera world seems a bit like the world of computing these days. Companies sell always new, more powerful hardware to stay up to date with new and more demanding software, which in fact very seldom improves user experience. At least for software there's the open source community, much more sensitive to a minimalist/high productivity approach, but what about cameras? I have a silly idea: a modular camera, that you can build on your needs like a PC. You don't buy the 73rd autofocus point, if you don't need it. You don't buy smile detection if you only use Av. You can keep it simple and lightweight, or make it look like (Concise) Oxford dictionary, with as many functions as MS Word. If cameras and electronics have to merge, why not going all the way? A bit like Leica a la carte, but less stupidly useless. Now, why nobody came up with something like this? Why something like this exists for medium format but not for more compact formats? Shall I found a new company? ;-) Hey, anybody from Canon or Nikon listening? I would really like to have a serious answer. Andrea Because it would not be simple, lightweight or cheap, just like MF. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Does anybody have an answer?
"Pete D" wrote in message ... "sambarluc" wrote in message ... I have a silly idea: a modular camera, that you can build on your needs like a PC. You don't buy the 73rd autofocus point, if you don't need it. You don't buy smile detection if you only use Av. You can keep it simple and lightweight, or make it look like (Concise) Oxford dictionary, with as many functions as MS Word. If cameras and electronics have to merge, why not going all the way? A bit like Leica a la carte, but less stupidly useless. A PC can easily be assembled from major and add-on parts. A digital camera cannot. A digital camera with plug-in boards would be tough to carry around. Now, why nobody came up with something like this? Why something like this exists for medium format but not for more compact formats? Shall I found a new company? ;-) Hey, anybody from Canon or Nikon listening? I would really like to have a serious answer. Andrea Andrea, there is no reason why different software options could not be offered for a given digital camera. You have something there. But, the folks who build cameras rule here and they are currently selling new cameras as fast as they can and changing models as fast as they can. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Does anybody have an answer?
"Pete D" wrote in message ... "sambarluc" wrote in message ... Reading all the mess about DP2, and expectations on Olympus, and the SNIPPED Because then it would need to be about the same size as your desktop computer's base unit. Roy G |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DSLR vs. P&S Smackdown -- the Answer | Douglas Johnson[_2_] | Digital Photography | 85 | August 18th 08 05:18 PM |
Resampling the answer? | NearAustin | Digital Photography | 3 | June 10th 06 05:14 AM |
TROLL: I need an answer quick!! | Cynicor | Digital Photography | 32 | May 3rd 06 02:17 AM |
Fuji RAW - A Definitive Answer? | Humpty Dumpster | Digital Photography | 2 | November 18th 05 01:21 AM |
Final answer HELP! | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 7 | October 29th 05 08:12 AM |