I have been involved in photography since the late 1960s. I thoroughly understand the need and reasons for SLR in film cameras.
Somebody, please explain why SLR technology is needed for digital cameras--even high end ones.
If I understand correctly, the image on the LCD display of most digital cameras comes from the sensors located at the film plane, so it truly represents the view through the lens. Why then, go through the complexity of a moving mirror to give an optical view of what the lens will see? I don't get it, unless it is an effort to imply greater quality like the SLRs of the past?

__________________
1982 300SD " Wotan" ..On the road as of Jan 8, 2007 with Historic Tags

I think the quality of the image coming in has to be good first.

__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows - Robert A. Zimmerman

That's a valid question, my DSLR does both. I have found that the external display is only useful in low light (indoors). I was shooting outdoors yesterday and was unable to use the display to even review my photos without finding significant shade. Personally, I am more comfortable composing through the viewfinder; probably because that's how I've beed doing it for the last 40 years.

My biggest beef with DSLRs and other digital cameras is not having comvenient controls for the basic functions (aperture, shutter speed, and focusing). Having to learn how to navigate all the various menus is much harder to me than just knowing how to make a good photograph using those three elementary controls.

Unfortunately, I think only the more esoteric, and highest-priced models have those controls located on the body where they are easily accessible.

__________________
" We have nothing to fear but the main stream media itself . . . ."- Adapted from Franklin D Roosevelt for the 21st century

OBK #55

1998 Lincoln Continental - Sold
Max 1984 300TD 285,000 miles - Sold
The Dee8gonator 1987 560SEC 196,000 miles - Sold
Orgasmatron - 2006 CLS500 90,000 miles
2002 C320 Wagon 122,000 miles
2016 AMG GTS 12,000 miles

My nikon D5000 is reasonably straight forward to use in semi-manual mode. I does have full manual, but that is too complex to navigate in the field. It is easiest to put it in either shutter priority or aperture priority mode and use a simple thumb wheel to adjust the chosen parameter. I do keep that camera in auto focus mode and just lock in the focus/expose with a partial push of the shutter button before composing. I just ignore the other 95% of the controls most of the time.

I am still more comfortable using one of my old film bodies, but DSLRs can be used in the field if you selectively ignore most of the controls.

And I thought a built in lightmeter was the bee's knees.

__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows - Robert A. Zimmerman

I don't like to use the screen on the back because it gives you a disconnect to the subject.
My next purchase is going to be the Fujifilm X100; a camera I have been waiting for a long time: not as bulky as my Canon 5D and having a decent Leica M kind of view-finder.

Attached Thumbnails

 

__________________
1979 Black on Black, 300CD (sold), 1990 Black 300SE, Silver 1989 Volvo 780, 1988 300CE (vanished by the hands of a girlfriend), 1992 300CE (Rescue).

That's spiffy! I *almost* had my hands on a Leica digital that was listed in Craigslist for a ridiculously low price. Missed it by minutes. Oh well!

__________________
1992 300D 2.5T
1980 Euro 300D (sadly, sold)
1998 Jetta TDI, 132K "Rudy"
1974 Triumph TR6
1999 Saab 9-5 wagon (wife's)

If you want to get serious about it, then select the lenses before the body.

See, I knew there had to be a reason.
So, the image viewed thru the view finder of a DSL is the optical image, right? Couldn't they just as easily use a LCD in the pentaprism so that your eye covering the eyepeice provided the shade to see the image in bright sun light?

See, my questions are not limited to religion and politics. I question most things.

I agree about navigating endless menus. They were obviously designed by a computer geek--no one who ever used a SLR would make the manual, or semi manual controls so difficult to use. I used to think that the linking of aperture and shutter speed on some RFs was the end-all of technology. The angled front shutter release as pioneered by Practika/ Pentacon should become a standard feature--its the most natural position and aids in holding the camera steady.

__________________
1982 300SD " Wotan" ..On the road as of Jan 8, 2007 with Historic Tags

You guys might be interested in Micro four thirds cameras...about the size of a P&S but can take the lenses like an SLR. They are as much as a DSLR but to my knowledge a lot simpler and still good quality

__________________
TC
Current stable:
- 2004 Mazda RALLYWANKEL
- 2007 Saturn sky redline
- 2004 Explorer...under surgery.

Past: 135i, GTI, 300E, 300SD, 300SD, Stealth

I'm not sure if the quality of the image in a LCD would be equal to a direct optical image. LCDs still have limitations, I still prefer a direct optical image through the lens. The overall format of DSLRs is still based on film SLRs, I'm sure that's part of the reason too. You can certainly buy pretty good quality cameras that include just an LCD, with no viewfinder, if you want something smaller.

Reasons I like my DSLR's:

High quality, changeable lenses.
High quality construction (yes, some P&S cameras are also nicely built, but most are not)
Ease of changing settings (Dee8go's beef, my Cannon's seem to be great with this)
Not having to wait for the camera to take a picture when you push the shutter button!!!

-J

__________________
1991 350SDL. 230,000 miles (new motor @ 150,000). Blown head gasket

Tesla Model 3. 205,000 miles. Been to 48 states!
Past: A fleet of VW TDIs.... including a V10,a Dieselgate Passat, and 2 ECOdiesels.
2014 Cadillac ELR
2013 Fiat 500E.

Yes there was a Leica M8 body for sale on craigslist for I believe $2400. Very tempting, if not for the Leitz lenses being almost double that price.

I agree 4/3 is a good alternative between a bulky SLR and a compact camera, Olympus makes some very nice cameras these days with the new Pen series.

__________________
1979 Black on Black, 300CD (sold), 1990 Black 300SE, Silver 1989 Volvo 780, 1988 300CE (vanished by the hands of a girlfriend), 1992 300CE (Rescue).

Digital SLR is a very complicated subject. Basically the larger the sensor ( CCD device ) the more expensive is the camera. A sensor the size of the film is very expensive to make. The camera needs to 'crop' the picture for smaller sensor and it affects the 'angle of view' and focal length etc.

I am not really into photography but the advantage of SLR is you get what you see from the view finder. Easy to change lens and take picture at low light condition etc. I have a P&S and my wife uses a DSLR and you can tell the difference in the quality of the pictures, especially in low light condition.

__________________
Not MBZ nor A/C trained professional but a die-hard DIY and green engineer. Use the info at your own peril. Picked up 2 Infractions because of disagreements. NOW reversed.

W124 Keyless remote, PM for details. http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/mercedes-used-parts-sale-wanted/334620-fs-w124-chasis-keyless-remote-%2450-shipped.html

1 X 2006 CDI
1 x 87 300SDL
1 x 87 300D
1 x 87 300TDT wagon
1 x 83 300D
1 x 84 190D ( 5 sp ) - All R134 converted + keyless entry.