SLR vs P&S

funpig wrote in post #8135556
There are ergonomical advantages with using an LCD view screen. I am sure more than one SLR photographer has missed a shot of something spectactular happening outside of the frame because they were so focused on just the zoomed-in image in his optical viewfinder. Using an LCD, you are able to see all of your surroundings while you are shooting (helps to avoid stepping into an open manhole while you are shooting in the street) and you can quickly swing your camera towards a new photo opportunity.

I don't see how this has anything to do with an LCD screen. If you stick a lens with a 114 degree AoV on a camera where you see what the lens sees (SLR or current P&S), you will see just 114 degrees whether you look through a viewfinder or the sensor (LCD screen).

What you are talking about is a rangefinder, which is a completely different system and not relevant to this discussion.

Moreover, there is still no addressing the holding-the-camera-properly issue.

toxic wrote in post #8135882
I don't see how this has anything to do with an LCD screen. If you stick a lens with a 114 degree AoV on a camera where you see what the lens sees (SLR or current P&S), you will see just 114 degrees whether you look through a viewfinder or the sensor (LCD screen).

I like to hold the camera at arms length. I can compose through the LCD. Meanwhile, I can have both eyes open and I have full view of my surroundings regardless of how narrow of view I am shooting. I can change positions without tripping over or bumping into things because I don't have my one eye glued to a viewfinder. I also find shooting this way is easier to get candid shot. Yes, sometimes the sun washes out the LCD. I just shoot, review and re-shoot if necessary.

I'm not a pro and I don't shoot sports for a living. But I have gotten surprisingly decent shots of my son's games lacrosse with a simple point and shoot. I just guess where the action will be, set up, brace the camera, pre-focus and when something really good comes into view, I shoot. I can only get 5 or 6 shots per period with this method, but I found that most were keepers. Only problem is high ISO noise if poor lighting and motion blur if the subjects were moving really fast. I only acquired my Rebel XS recently (I had stopped using my film Elan II about 5 years ago because I liked the convenience and economics of shooting digital, but I never cared for the quality and cost of the early dSLR's). Now at the same lacrosse games, with the dSLR, I shoot 50 - 100 shots per period. The image quality is way better (very little noise even at ISO 1600, sharper, more detail and able to freeze action), but quite frankly I don't think the images are better, and maybe worse, than before. For me, the ability to shoot quicker with a larger sensor camera has translated into taking more high quality crappy photos with less fore-thought. I find that I delete most of them to keep my album manageable. And for me, I get a bit of a headache because I spend so much time squinting through the little viewfinder during the game. I'm approaching 50 years and my vision is getting worse. That is one of the reasons why I would like to have a better live view camera, but with the better dSLR image quality.

I'll repeat for last time. I am not advocating that we should get rid of the SLR, altogether. I just think there would be certain advantages if a camera can be designed without the SLR (read previous posts). I have a lot of gadgets which serve different purposes. I own more than one type of fishing rod and reel. And I drive more than one type of vehicle. And every once in a while, I'll even throw a roll of film in the old Nikkormat or my Dad's Voigtlander from the '50s', just to take photos in a classic, slow, contemplative and more challenging way (and to see if they still work).

funpig wrote in post #8136299
I like to hold the camera at arms length. I can compose through the LCD. Meanwhile, I can have both eyes open and I have full view of my surroundings regardless of how narrow of view I am shooting. I can change positions without tripping over or bumping into things because I don't have my one eye glued to a viewfinder. I also find shooting this way is easier to get candid shot. Yes, sometimes the sun washes out the LCD. I just shoot, review and re-shoot if necessary.

How do you steady it? Seriously, I cannot imagine getting remotely good images from this technique. However, if it works for you then great. Just saying for the most of us, this would pose quite a challenge, especially with a 70-200 or larger dangling of the end... I relegate LV for tripod, portaiture, landscape, and macro work only.

10megapixel wrote in post #8134316
And an awkward silence falls upon the crowd...

This camera is gonna be a HOT item I think

It does NOT have the same size sensor as a DSLR.

It uses a 4/3, which is the same as every other P&S.

Duncan Frenz wrote in post #8136318
How do you steady it? Seriously, I cannot imagine getting remotely good images from this technique. However, if it works for you then great. Just saying for the most of us, this would pose quite a challenge, especially with a 70-200 or larger dangling of the end... I relegate LV for tripod, portaiture, landscape, and macro work only.

Guys you missed the whole point. It is not about looking at the back of the camera of via a viefinder. It is about removing the main feature that makes SLR ..well an SLR - the mirror. Also the mechanical shutter goes away.
I have an ages old Fuji that implements both - large LCD on the back and an electronic viewfinder, which by todays measure is very coarse but still is useful in bright light when the external LCD is of little use.

vadim_c wrote in post #8136395
I have an ages old Fuji that implements both - large LCD on the back and an electronic viewfinder, which by todays measure is very coarse but still is useful in bright light when the external LCD is of little use.

I had one of those. It sucked.

MikeFairbanks wrote in post #8136390
It does NOT have the same size sensor as a DSLR.

It uses a 4/3, which is the same as every other P&S.

No, actually. 4/3 is half the size of 35mm film, whereas P&S sensors are (usually) at least 5 times smaller. The largest is 1/1.8", which is around 4.5x, I think.

MikeFairbanks wrote in post #8136390
It does NOT have the same size sensor as a DSLR .

It uses a 4/3, which is the same as every other P&S.

I was refering to the Olympus EP1 and I never said it had the same size sensor as a DSLR (even though it does)
4/3 system sensor is not the same as every other P&S, for example...

Canon G10 sensor~ 7.6 x 5.32 CCD
Olympus EP1~ 17.3 x 13.0 CMOS ( Same as E-30 SLR )

A Four Thirds sensor is 5.6 times larger in area than the largest of digital P&S camera sensors.

Learn a little more about it HERE

vadim_c wrote in post #8136395
Guys you missed the whole point. It is not about looking at the back of the camera of via a viefinder. It is about removing the main feature that makes SLR ..well an SLR - the mirror. Also the mechanical shutter goes away.
I have an ages old Fuji that implements both - large LCD on the back and an electronic viewfinder, which by todays measure is very coarse but still is useful in bright light when the external LCD is of little use.

No, I got the point perfectly fine.

I was responding to the person I quoted. HE said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by funpig

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

Yeah, I differ from Vadim_C. He appears to want to replace the SLR mirror/optical viewfinder with an electronic one (evf). I would want to get rid of both and put this camera between a p & s (convenience of live view shooting) and dslr (better IQ from larger sensor and ability to change lenses). To me the evf would be redundent (added expense, weight, etc.) I would want any money, design or space saved by removing the viewfinder be directed towards maximizing the size, response, AF performance of the LCD. The next six months should tell us whether Olympus is on the right track or not with their EP1.

MikeFairbanks wrote in post #8136390
It does NOT have the same size sensor as a DSLR.
It uses a 4/3, which is the same as every other P&S.

"The E-P1's Four Thirds sensor – the same physical size used in the company's E-series DSLRs – features an ISO range of 100-6400 when shooting in manual mode." - Digital Camera Review -
See Full Article: http://www.digitalcame​rareview.com …D=4013&review=o​lympus+ep1

"The E-P1’s sensor is the same size as Olympus’ top-of-the-line E-3 DSLR." - Photo.net -
See Full Article: http://photo.net …ment/olympus/ep​1/preview/

...