"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Arfa Daily wrote:
"dennis@home" wrote in message
...

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

No, I wasn't either. I have two friends who both own top end digital
SLRs, one because he is a professional photographer, and the other
because he is a very keen hobbyist. I have looked at the viewfinder
images closely on both of these cameras, and the rendition of flesh
tones in all the varieties is excellent, and the professional of the
two has commented to me how good he thinks the viewfinder is at colour
rendition under all light levels (input that is, not viewing
conditions).
Top level digital SLRs don't use any electronics in the viewfinder, its
all done with mirrors.
There are only a few that use electronic viewfinders and they are low
end.

I'm pretty sure that one of them told me that his camera was over a
grand's worth, so I wouldn't call that particularly low end, although I
am sure there are others more expensive. If they do not have an LCD panel
on them to at least review the pictures you have taken, without having to
plug the thing into a computer, that rather defeats the object of it
being a portable 'digital' camera, doesn't it ? Even the 3 grand offering
on this page has a 3" LCD

http://www.calumetphoto.co.uk/Digita...utm_medium=cpc

Perhaps I am not being quite accurate in calling it a "viewfinder". I
accept that the higher end cameras have a proper optical viewfinder
operating on the SLR mirror / prism system, but the LCD panel also serves
as a supplementary viewfinder, as well as a display medium for photos
already taken.


It does not and cannot, because there is a ****ing great mirror between
the lens and the CCD as well as a closed shutter.

OK?
Arfa

Calm down my boy ! It's just a newsgroup discussion ... d:-)

Arfa