Information on camera

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi!

I would like to know if there is some digital camera which
would look like some old (classic) small camera. For example
which would not have LCD display. Something I could play
with like with manual camera only that it has digital sensor
and memory card instead of a film.

If there is nothing like that I think there should be. What
do you think? I think it would be great to have something
small and robust without LCD display (who needs it anyway
if you have 1 GB memory card - you can always delete bad
photos on computer).


Mike

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi!

Mark B. wrote:
> It'll cost ya. It still has an LCD, but it can be turned around to look
> like a normal rangefiner:
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sp [...] on_rd1.asp

Unbelievable. So, there is something like that.

I have not known that Epson makes cameras. What is the quality of theirs
cameras?

Which lenses could I use with this camera?

Is there some other similar camera?


Mike

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

So why is it that you don't want the LCD display, it is pretty useful
to have. With it you can check the exposure of your shots, having a
histogram is great. If you really don't want it on many cameras will
let you turn it off. DSLR cameras tend to leave it off unless you are
looking at your photos or running through the menus. With a digital
camera this is some interaction that you need to do with the camera
from time to time, how are you going to do this with out some kind of
display?

Scott

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mark B. wrote:

> "Mike Mimic" <ppagee@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:cuecpk$727$1@planja.arnes.si...
>
>>Hi!
>>
>>I would like to know if there is some digital camera which
>>would look like some old (classic) small camera. For example
>>which would not have LCD display. Something I could play
>>with like with manual camera only that it has digital sensor
>>and memory card instead of a film.
>>
>>If there is nothing like that I think there should be. What
>>do you think? I think it would be great to have something
>>small and robust without LCD display (who needs it anyway
>>if you have 1 GB memory card - you can always delete bad
>>photos on computer).
>>
>>
>>Mike
>
>
> It'll cost ya. It still has an LCD, but it can be turned around to look
> like a normal rangefiner:
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sp [...] on_rd1.asp

What does 'rangefinder' mean? Looks like a DSLR.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mark B. wrote:

> "paul" <paul@not.net> wrote in message
> news:F8OdnQxIWIVRbJHfRVn-rQ@speakeasy.net...
>
>>Mark B. wrote:
>>
>>>It'll cost ya. It still has an LCD, but it can be turned around to look
>>>like a normal rangefiner:
>>>
>>>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Epson/epson_rd1.asp
>>
>>What does 'rangefinder' mean? Looks like a DSLR.
>
>
> Although it has interchangeable lenses, if it was a true DSLR the viewfinder
> would look through the lens. It doesn't; it has a separate viewfinder which
> makes it a rangefinder. Here's Epson's website:
>
> http://www.epson.co.uk/products/di [...] as/RD1.htm

Uck, my oly digicam has a separate viewfinder & it's totally off,
useless. What's the advantage that is costs $3,000? No noisy mirror
doesn't seem much advantage & ought to cost less. You can't even see
zooming effects?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Peter Irwin wrote:
>
> paul <paul@not.net> wrote:
> >
> > What does 'rangefinder' mean? Looks like a DSLR.
>
> Rangefinders measure distances by parallax. The centre of the
> viewfinder has two overlapping images: one is from the window
> in front of the viewfinder, the other is from another window
> a few inches away. It is usually done with mirrors, sometimes
> with prisms. In a coupled rangefinder, adjusting the focus on
> the lens also moves the mirror behind the rangefinder window.
> When the two images coincide exactly, the image will be in focus.
>
> On a really precise camera such as the Leica M series cameras,
> focusing normal and wide angle lenses tends to be more accurate
> than through the lens focusing on an SLR. Rangefinders are at
> a disadvantage with longer lenses: a 135mm lens is the longest
> practical for a Leica rangefinder and is not as satisfactory
> as a 135mm lens on an SLR.
>
> Some reasons people like rangefinders are:
> - the viewfinder doesn't black out when you take a picture
> - the cameras are often quieter than SLRs
> - wide angle lenses can be smaller and of better optical
> performance because there is no requirement to give clearance
> for a mirror between the back of the lens and the film/sensor.
> - the prefer the separate viewfinder to looking at the focusing
> screen of an SLR.

some reasons people do not like rangefinders:

viewfinder parallax errors close up.
what you see is not what you get-
if you can change lenses, the VF is correct only for one.


>
> The only way to tell if it is right for you is to try one.
>
> Peter.
> --
> pirwin@ktb.net