Digital or SLR??

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

guys
just came in from fishing.....guess a northern bit my hook in half this
morning....happened before
now to answer ur question---CANON
SLR----SINGLE LENS REFLEX--DIGITAL CAMERA
EOS---CANON 35mm Series cameras
Power Shot----digital
sure shot----35mm
Really got into digital when my daughter sent me fotos of a live volcano in
Hawaii, my friend sent pics of deer in his backyard, and my son came home
from Ireland and Europe and wouldnt let me normally hold all 35 rolls of
pics....exactly....what is the sense of taking stuff when u get to picky
about it.....
digital is more flexable...can come in from out in the cold, take the flash
card out and put it into the printer and presto u got ur pics, can now
download them into ur cdrw, or make fast prints, or even a tee shirt.....
canon sure shot 35 mm camera is a neat camera...got it for my wife...hard to
download quality pics with it and send them over the internet....still use
my polaroid for record keeping and the like....Canon SLR or EOS is for those
who are into photography in a big way and dont mind paying $1000 to 1500 or
more...
Power Shot is an all around tool.250--400...Sony got a couple of smaller
digital cameras i like but since i dont own one cant comment on
them....Anyone who has Netscape has a great browser for receiving digital
photos followed by microsoft, opera, adelphia, yahoo...and then the
rest.....excite etc...
hope this answers ur questions
crusty old feller
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

"Mike" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:1115229353.18054.0@sabbath.news.uk.clara.net...
> can anyone ell me what the difference is.
>
> SLR seems more expensive but im not sure what SLR means
>
> TIA
>

to clarify not what SLR stands for, but what SLR means in terms of the
camera i.e. the differences over a normal digital camera

TIA
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

Mike wrote:
> "Mike" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:1115229353.18054.0@sabbath.news.uk.clara.net...
>
>>can anyone ell me what the difference is.
>>
>>SLR seems more expensive but im not sure what SLR means
>>
>>TIA
>>
>
>
> to clarify not what SLR stands for, but what SLR means in terms of the
> camera i.e. the differences over a normal digital camera
>
> TIA
>
>
The term SLR, when applied to a digicam, means that it is possible to switch lenses.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

SLR stands for "single lens reflex"
This is an out of date technique of being able to look through the same lens
as the picture will be taken from. This means there is a lens that has to
slap out of the way when the picture is taken for the lens to be used for
the shot. This isn't necessary for digital pictures. Digital cam users do
not "close their eyes" when they take a picture like SLR users do.

Much mechanical alignment technique is required by a skilled camera tech to
align what you see is what you get and the alignment is critical with this
mirror technique Most DigiCam users always look through the lens that will
take the picture and see what they will actually shoot, with light
compensation in place before the shot.

Some day these SLR cameras will only be seen in museums and we will be
bewildered by the ancient mechanical nightmare mechanism technology.

"Mike" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:1115229353.18054.0@sabbath.news.uk.clara.net...
> can anyone ell me what the difference is.
>
> SLR seems more expensive but im not sure what SLR means
>
> TIA
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

In article <117i9eesr0sp84d@corp.supernews.com>, physchem@cloud9.net says...

>The term SLR, when applied to a digicam, means that it is possible to switch
>lenses.

True, but rangefinders could have, and have had interchangable lens too.

The really big deal is that the SLR viewfinder views through the actual
camera lens, instead of some little second window which sees something else
from a different position. Then your SLR shows exactly the image that will
be captured, regardless if you use a macro lens for extreme closeup, or
extreme wideangle or telephoto lens.

The rear LCD on a regular digital also shows the actual image too, but it is
too small and poor quality to be able to focus or judge critically. The SLR
viewfinder is bright and clear, designed to help focus.

See http://www.answers.com/topic/single-lens-reflex-camera
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

In message <_ccee.244$fQ2.215@trnddc05>,
Wayne Fulton <nospam@invalid.com> wrote:

>The rear LCD on a regular digital also shows the actual image too, but it is
>too small and poor quality to be able to focus or judge critically. The SLR
>viewfinder is bright and clear, designed to help focus.

The SLR viewfinder is a little sharper than the LCD ones, but it by no
means has all of the resolution that the film or sensor is seeing.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

The SLR viewfinder is made of granular surface glass otherwise the light
wouldn't be visable on it as a screen. There isn't more resulution really.

My digital has a manual focus zoom that gives me pixel for pixel manual
focusing while I am touching the focus switch. You won't get that in a
chemical camera.

35mm film may not last more than a few years and be extremelty expensive for
the no name manufacturers to sell to you.

Kodak predicted this back in about 1999

<JPS@no.komm> wrote in message
news:52pi71lu3khvch2e8sdmesobtekrs9mgdb@4ax.com...
> In message <_ccee.244$fQ2.215@trnddc05>,
> Wayne Fulton <nospam@invalid.com> wrote:
>
> >The rear LCD on a regular digital also shows the actual image too, but it
is
> >too small and poor quality to be able to focus or judge critically. The
SLR
> >viewfinder is bright and clear, designed to help focus.
>
> The SLR viewfinder is a little sharper than the LCD ones, but it by no
> means has all of the resolution that the film or sensor is seeing.
> --
>
> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Wed, 4 May 2005 18:55:50 +0100, "Mike" <me@privacy.net> wrote:

>can anyone ell me what the difference is.
>
>SLR seems more expensive but im not sure what SLR means
>
>TIA
>



Plus no preview of recorded Image, puts me right off.

Yes read a review of the Canon 350D and you can't even use the Histogram
when shooting or LCD screen.

Are all SLR Digital cameras like this..?
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Wed, 04 May 2005 22:42:02 GMT, Wayne Fulton <nospam@invalid.com> wrote:

>In article <117i9eesr0sp84d@corp.supernews.com>, physchem@cloud9.net says...
>
>>The term SLR, when applied to a digicam, means that it is possible to switch
>>lenses.
>
>True, but rangefinders could have, and have had interchangable lens too.
>
>The really big deal is that the SLR viewfinder views through the actual
>camera lens, instead of some little second window which sees something else
>from a different position. Then your SLR shows exactly the image that will
>be captured, regardless if you use a macro lens for extreme closeup, or
>extreme wideangle or telephoto lens.
>
>The rear LCD on a regular digital also shows the actual image too, but it is
>too small and poor quality to be able to focus or judge critically. The SLR
>viewfinder is bright and clear, designed to help focus.
>
>See http://www.answers.com/topic/single-lens-reflex-camera



So my Digital Viewfinder on my Sony F717 does not exist.

Are you referring to None Digital SLR's.?

as it seams that way..
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

On Wed, 4 May 2005 18:55:50 +0100, "Mike" <me@privacy.net> wrote:

>can anyone ell me what the difference is.
>
>SLR seems more expensive but im not sure what SLR means
>
>TIA
>



Are you referring to Digital SLR as that is what most replies seem to think.

Digital SLR like the Nikon F70 or Canon 350D


These are budget models..
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

Mike wrote:
> can anyone ell me what the difference is.
>
> SLR seems more expensive but im not sure what SLR means

There are three important differences between digital SLRs and advanced
compact digital cameras that look a lot like SLRs ... but only the first
one is actually part of the SLR design.

SLR stands for "single-lens reflex", and describes the type of
viewfinder. An SLR uses a mirror directly in front of the shutter that
bounces light to a prism which in turn directs it to the eyepiece where
you see it. Since the mirror intercepts the light coming through the
actual picture-taking lens, you see what the film or digital image
sensor will see; when you press the shutter release the mirror flips out
of the way just before the shutter opens, and the light coming through
the lens passes through to the film or sensor. The eyepiece blacks out
until the shutter closes and the mirror returns to its original
position. Since an SLR's viewfinder is strictly optical, it doesn't
drain batteries. But because you cannot see what the camera sees during
exposure -- meaning you can't adjust focus, exposure or even aiming --
no digital SLR includes a "movie" mode.

Some advanced digital compacts use electronic viewfinders (EVFs) that
essentially use a tiny LCD display in the eyepiece and show you exactly
what the image sensor sees -- it's very SLR-like, since it also shows
exactly what the picture-taking lens sees. The EVF may or may not black
out during the time that the image sensor is recording the image into
memory. Some cameras that use EVFs can send the sensor's image-data to
the eyepiece and memory simultaneously in "movie" mode. But EVFs
require power continuously when in use, not just when you're actually
taking pictures. This may result in fewer shots per battery charge; you
may need to carry a spare battery or two, although that's usually a good
idea with any digital camera. (For obvious reasons, film cameras don't
have EVFs.)

Other compact cameras use a simple optical viewfinder that has its own
tiny separate lens mounted near the picture-taking lens. While these
viewfinders don't drain batteries, neither do they show exactly what the
picture-taking lens "sees". Most of them work well enough for casual
snapshooting, but they can't be as precise as a viewfinder that uses the
actual picture-taking lens.

The second big difference between digital SLRs and non-SLRs is that
every digital SLR I've heard of uses interchangeable lenses while nearly
all non-SLR digitals have permanently-attached lenses. If the lens that
comes with your digital SLR can't quite get that particular wide-angle
or telephoto shot you want, you can remove it from the camera body and
replace it with one that's better suited to the task; you can't do that
with a fixed lens, although some of the better digital compacts
accommodate adapter lenses that help extend the fixed lens's
capabilities a bit.

The third important difference actually has more to do with the size and
price of the camera than anything else -- and digital SLRs are generally
both larger and more expensive than digital compacts. As a rule,
digital SLRs use physically larger image sensors than compacts; the more
expensive (and usually larger) SLRs usually have larger sensors than
their less expensive kin. When everything else (including the number of
pixels) is the same, a larger sensor means less digital noise in the
captured image. This may not matter much if your primary interest is
taking snapshots that won't be printed any larger than 4x6 or 5x7, but
it's a very important consideration if you need high quality that lets
you see fine detail or make large prints.

No one camera has the perfect combination of features for every
photographic situation, which is why there are so many different cameras
to choose from. It's your job to decide just which features are most
important to you, then find the camera or cameras that best fit your
requirements.

--
Walter Luffman Medina, TN USA
Amateur curmudgeon, equal opportunity annoyer
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

One advantage of the true SLR film camera is that the viewfinder usually
includes a focus aid that can be extremely effective when used with manual
focus. The typical digital cameras LCD screen is not nearly as precise.

"BucketButt" <bucketbutt@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:3e5p5tF1akriU1@individual.net...
> Mike wrote:
>> can anyone ell me what the difference is.
>>
>> SLR seems more expensive but im not sure what SLR means
>
> There are three important differences between digital SLRs and advanced
> compact digital cameras that look a lot like SLRs ... but only the first
> one is actually part of the SLR design.
>
> SLR stands for "single-lens reflex", and describes the type of viewfinder.
> An SLR uses a mirror directly in front of the shutter that bounces light
> to a prism which in turn directs it to the eyepiece where you see it.
> Since the mirror intercepts the light coming through the actual
> picture-taking lens, you see what the film or digital image sensor will
> see; when you press the shutter release the mirror flips out of the way
> just before the shutter opens, and the light coming through the lens
> passes through to the film or sensor. The eyepiece blacks out until the
> shutter closes and the mirror returns to its original position. Since an
> SLR's viewfinder is strictly optical, it doesn't drain batteries. But
> because you cannot see what the camera sees during exposure -- meaning you
> can't adjust focus, exposure or even aiming --
> no digital SLR includes a "movie" mode.
>
> Some advanced digital compacts use electronic viewfinders (EVFs) that
> essentially use a tiny LCD display in the eyepiece and show you exactly
> what the image sensor sees -- it's very SLR-like, since it also shows
> exactly what the picture-taking lens sees. The EVF may or may not black
> out during the time that the image sensor is recording the image into
> memory. Some cameras that use EVFs can send the sensor's image-data to
> the eyepiece and memory simultaneously in "movie" mode. But EVFs require
> power continuously when in use, not just when you're actually taking
> pictures. This may result in fewer shots per battery charge; you may need
> to carry a spare battery or two, although that's usually a good idea with
> any digital camera. (For obvious reasons, film cameras don't have EVFs.)
>
> Other compact cameras use a simple optical viewfinder that has its own
> tiny separate lens mounted near the picture-taking lens. While these
> viewfinders don't drain batteries, neither do they show exactly what the
> picture-taking lens "sees". Most of them work well enough for casual
> snapshooting, but they can't be as precise as a viewfinder that uses the
> actual picture-taking lens.
>
> The second big difference between digital SLRs and non-SLRs is that every
> digital SLR I've heard of uses interchangeable lenses while nearly all
> non-SLR digitals have permanently-attached lenses. If the lens that comes
> with your digital SLR can't quite get that particular wide-angle or
> telephoto shot you want, you can remove it from the camera body and
> replace it with one that's better suited to the task; you can't do that
> with a fixed lens, although some of the better digital compacts
> accommodate adapter lenses that help extend the fixed lens's capabilities
> a bit.
>
> The third important difference actually has more to do with the size and
> price of the camera than anything else -- and digital SLRs are generally
> both larger and more expensive than digital compacts. As a rule, digital
> SLRs use physically larger image sensors than compacts; the more expensive
> (and usually larger) SLRs usually have larger sensors than their less
> expensive kin. When everything else (including the number of pixels) is
> the same, a larger sensor means less digital noise in the captured image.
> This may not matter much if your primary interest is taking snapshots that
> won't be printed any larger than 4x6 or 5x7, but it's a very important
> consideration if you need high quality that lets you see fine detail or
> make large prints.
>
> No one camera has the perfect combination of features for every
> photographic situation, which is why there are so many different cameras
> to choose from. It's your job to decide just which features are most
> important to you, then find the camera or cameras that best fit your
> requirements.
>
> --
> Walter Luffman Medina, TN USA
> Amateur curmudgeon, equal opportunity annoyer
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

How would you know if your snadblasted glass screen has the same focus as
your film does? This is totally reliant on how acurate and how recently your
camera was set up. With an LCD screen the focus is exactly what you will get
for an image.

"Chuck" <cdkuder@nspmmsn.com> wrote in message
news:u2die.41513$gc6.41011@okepread04...
> One advantage of the true SLR film camera is that the viewfinder usually
> includes a focus aid that can be extremely effective when used with manual
> focus. The typical digital cameras LCD screen is not nearly as precise.
>
> "BucketButt" <bucketbutt@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:3e5p5tF1akriU1@individual.net...
> > Mike wrote:
> >> can anyone ell me what the difference is.
> >>
> >> SLR seems more expensive but im not sure what SLR means
> >
> > There are three important differences between digital SLRs and advanced
> > compact digital cameras that look a lot like SLRs ... but only the first
> > one is actually part of the SLR design.
> >
> > SLR stands for "single-lens reflex", and describes the type of
viewfinder.
> > An SLR uses a mirror directly in front of the shutter that bounces light
> > to a prism which in turn directs it to the eyepiece where you see it.
> > Since the mirror intercepts the light coming through the actual
> > picture-taking lens, you see what the film or digital image sensor will
> > see; when you press the shutter release the mirror flips out of the way
> > just before the shutter opens, and the light coming through the lens
> > passes through to the film or sensor. The eyepiece blacks out until the
> > shutter closes and the mirror returns to its original position. Since
an
> > SLR's viewfinder is strictly optical, it doesn't drain batteries. But
> > because you cannot see what the camera sees during exposure -- meaning
you
> > can't adjust focus, exposure or even aiming --
> > no digital SLR includes a "movie" mode.
> >
> > Some advanced digital compacts use electronic viewfinders (EVFs) that
> > essentially use a tiny LCD display in the eyepiece and show you exactly
> > what the image sensor sees -- it's very SLR-like, since it also shows
> > exactly what the picture-taking lens sees. The EVF may or may not black
> > out during the time that the image sensor is recording the image into
> > memory. Some cameras that use EVFs can send the sensor's image-data to
> > the eyepiece and memory simultaneously in "movie" mode. But EVFs
require
> > power continuously when in use, not just when you're actually taking
> > pictures. This may result in fewer shots per battery charge; you may
need
> > to carry a spare battery or two, although that's usually a good idea
with
> > any digital camera. (For obvious reasons, film cameras don't have
EVFs.)
> >
> > Other compact cameras use a simple optical viewfinder that has its own
> > tiny separate lens mounted near the picture-taking lens. While these
> > viewfinders don't drain batteries, neither do they show exactly what the
> > picture-taking lens "sees". Most of them work well enough for casual
> > snapshooting, but they can't be as precise as a viewfinder that uses the
> > actual picture-taking lens.
> >
> > The second big difference between digital SLRs and non-SLRs is that
every
> > digital SLR I've heard of uses interchangeable lenses while nearly all
> > non-SLR digitals have permanently-attached lenses. If the lens that
comes
> > with your digital SLR can't quite get that particular wide-angle or
> > telephoto shot you want, you can remove it from the camera body and
> > replace it with one that's better suited to the task; you can't do that
> > with a fixed lens, although some of the better digital compacts
> > accommodate adapter lenses that help extend the fixed lens's
capabilities
> > a bit.
> >
> > The third important difference actually has more to do with the size and
> > price of the camera than anything else -- and digital SLRs are generally
> > both larger and more expensive than digital compacts. As a rule,
digital
> > SLRs use physically larger image sensors than compacts; the more
expensive
> > (and usually larger) SLRs usually have larger sensors than their less
> > expensive kin. When everything else (including the number of pixels) is
> > the same, a larger sensor means less digital noise in the captured
image.
> > This may not matter much if your primary interest is taking snapshots
that
> > won't be printed any larger than 4x6 or 5x7, but it's a very important
> > consideration if you need high quality that lets you see fine detail or
> > make large prints.
> >
> > No one camera has the perfect combination of features for every
> > photographic situation, which is why there are so many different cameras
> > to choose from. It's your job to decide just which features are most
> > important to you, then find the camera or cameras that best fit your
> > requirements.
> >
> > --
> > Walter Luffman Medina, TN USA
> > Amateur curmudgeon, equal opportunity annoyer
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

The films distance from the lens and thickness of the film is fixed. The
focus screen on an SLR usually includes a "bullseye" and a split image
bubble. Both are more precise than the plain ground glass are. In addition,
focusing is usually done with the lens wide open. The Digitals LCD focus
arrangement on many of the camera is harder to use, at least in "normal"
light levels. In low light leves, the LCD focus may be easier to use than
the SLR glass screen.

"John P Bengi" <JBengi(spam)@(spam)yahoo,com> wrote in message
news:_LydnV1AtdPkxhffRVn-iw@golden.net...
> How would you know if your snadblasted glass screen has the same focus as
> your film does? This is totally reliant on how acurate and how recently
> your
> camera was set up. With an LCD screen the focus is exactly what you will
> get
> for an image.
>
> "Chuck" <cdkuder@nspmmsn.com> wrote in message
> news:u2die.41513$gc6.41011@okepread04...
>> One advantage of the true SLR film camera is that the viewfinder usually
>> includes a focus aid that can be extremely effective when used with
>> manual
>> focus. The typical digital cameras LCD screen is not nearly as precise.
>>
>> "BucketButt" <bucketbutt@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>> news:3e5p5tF1akriU1@individual.net...
>> > Mike wrote:
>> >> can anyone ell me what the difference is.
>> >>
>> >> SLR seems more expensive but im not sure what SLR means
>> >
>> > There are three important differences between digital SLRs and advanced
>> > compact digital cameras that look a lot like SLRs ... but only the
>> > first
>> > one is actually part of the SLR design.
>> >
>> > SLR stands for "single-lens reflex", and describes the type of
> viewfinder.
>> > An SLR uses a mirror directly in front of the shutter that bounces
>> > light
>> > to a prism which in turn directs it to the eyepiece where you see it.
>> > Since the mirror intercepts the light coming through the actual
>> > picture-taking lens, you see what the film or digital image sensor will
>> > see; when you press the shutter release the mirror flips out of the way
>> > just before the shutter opens, and the light coming through the lens
>> > passes through to the film or sensor. The eyepiece blacks out until
>> > the
>> > shutter closes and the mirror returns to its original position. Since
> an
>> > SLR's viewfinder is strictly optical, it doesn't drain batteries. But
>> > because you cannot see what the camera sees during exposure -- meaning
> you
>> > can't adjust focus, exposure or even aiming --
>> > no digital SLR includes a "movie" mode.
>> >
>> > Some advanced digital compacts use electronic viewfinders (EVFs) that
>> > essentially use a tiny LCD display in the eyepiece and show you exactly
>> > what the image sensor sees -- it's very SLR-like, since it also shows
>> > exactly what the picture-taking lens sees. The EVF may or may not
>> > black
>> > out during the time that the image sensor is recording the image into
>> > memory. Some cameras that use EVFs can send the sensor's image-data to
>> > the eyepiece and memory simultaneously in "movie" mode. But EVFs
> require
>> > power continuously when in use, not just when you're actually taking
>> > pictures. This may result in fewer shots per battery charge; you may
> need
>> > to carry a spare battery or two, although that's usually a good idea
> with
>> > any digital camera. (For obvious reasons, film cameras don't have
> EVFs.)
>> >
>> > Other compact cameras use a simple optical viewfinder that has its own
>> > tiny separate lens mounted near the picture-taking lens. While these
>> > viewfinders don't drain batteries, neither do they show exactly what
>> > the
>> > picture-taking lens "sees". Most of them work well enough for casual
>> > snapshooting, but they can't be as precise as a viewfinder that uses
>> > the
>> > actual picture-taking lens.
>> >
>> > The second big difference between digital SLRs and non-SLRs is that
> every
>> > digital SLR I've heard of uses interchangeable lenses while nearly all
>> > non-SLR digitals have permanently-attached lenses. If the lens that
> comes
>> > with your digital SLR can't quite get that particular wide-angle or
>> > telephoto shot you want, you can remove it from the camera body and
>> > replace it with one that's better suited to the task; you can't do that
>> > with a fixed lens, although some of the better digital compacts
>> > accommodate adapter lenses that help extend the fixed lens's
> capabilities
>> > a bit.
>> >
>> > The third important difference actually has more to do with the size
>> > and
>> > price of the camera than anything else -- and digital SLRs are
>> > generally
>> > both larger and more expensive than digital compacts. As a rule,
> digital
>> > SLRs use physically larger image sensors than compacts; the more
> expensive
>> > (and usually larger) SLRs usually have larger sensors than their less
>> > expensive kin. When everything else (including the number of pixels)
>> > is
>> > the same, a larger sensor means less digital noise in the captured
> image.
>> > This may not matter much if your primary interest is taking snapshots
> that
>> > won't be printed any larger than 4x6 or 5x7, but it's a very important
>> > consideration if you need high quality that lets you see fine detail or
>> > make large prints.
>> >
>> > No one camera has the perfect combination of features for every
>> > photographic situation, which is why there are so many different
>> > cameras
>> > to choose from. It's your job to decide just which features are most
>> > important to you, then find the camera or cameras that best fit your
>> > requirements.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Walter Luffman Medina, TN USA
>> > Amateur curmudgeon, equal opportunity annoyer
>>
>>
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

Why are the ground glass screens adjustable to make the focus correct then?

If they weren't adjustable the focus on every camera would be way off. With
digital you are looking at the film image.

The resolution of that "ground glass" is less than the LCD image anyway.

"Chuck" <cdkuder@nspmmsn.com> wrote in message
news:Fwuie.41586$gc6.22253@okepread04...
> The films distance from the lens and thickness of the film is fixed. The
> focus screen on an SLR usually includes a "bullseye" and a split image
> bubble. Both are more precise than the plain ground glass are. In
addition,
> focusing is usually done with the lens wide open. The Digitals LCD focus
> arrangement on many of the camera is harder to use, at least in "normal"
> light levels. In low light leves, the LCD focus may be easier to use than
> the SLR glass screen.
>
> "John P Bengi" <JBengi(spam)@(spam)yahoo,com> wrote in message
> news:_LydnV1AtdPkxhffRVn-iw@golden.net...
> > How would you know if your snadblasted glass screen has the same focus
as
> > your film does? This is totally reliant on how acurate and how recently
> > your
> > camera was set up. With an LCD screen the focus is exactly what you will
> > get
> > for an image.
> >
> > "Chuck" <cdkuder@nspmmsn.com> wrote in message
> > news:u2die.41513$gc6.41011@okepread04...
> >> One advantage of the true SLR film camera is that the viewfinder
usually
> >> includes a focus aid that can be extremely effective when used with
> >> manual
> >> focus. The typical digital cameras LCD screen is not nearly as precise.
> >>
> >> "BucketButt" <bucketbutt@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >> news:3e5p5tF1akriU1@individual.net...
> >> > Mike wrote:
> >> >> can anyone ell me what the difference is.
> >> >>
> >> >> SLR seems more expensive but im not sure what SLR means
> >> >
> >> > There are three important differences between digital SLRs and
advanced
> >> > compact digital cameras that look a lot like SLRs ... but only the
> >> > first
> >> > one is actually part of the SLR design.
> >> >
> >> > SLR stands for "single-lens reflex", and describes the type of
> > viewfinder.
> >> > An SLR uses a mirror directly in front of the shutter that bounces
> >> > light
> >> > to a prism which in turn directs it to the eyepiece where you see it.
> >> > Since the mirror intercepts the light coming through the actual
> >> > picture-taking lens, you see what the film or digital image sensor
will
> >> > see; when you press the shutter release the mirror flips out of the
way
> >> > just before the shutter opens, and the light coming through the lens
> >> > passes through to the film or sensor. The eyepiece blacks out until
> >> > the
> >> > shutter closes and the mirror returns to its original position.
Since
> > an
> >> > SLR's viewfinder is strictly optical, it doesn't drain batteries.
But
> >> > because you cannot see what the camera sees during exposure --
meaning
> > you
> >> > can't adjust focus, exposure or even aiming --
> >> > no digital SLR includes a "movie" mode.
> >> >
> >> > Some advanced digital compacts use electronic viewfinders (EVFs) that
> >> > essentially use a tiny LCD display in the eyepiece and show you
exactly
> >> > what the image sensor sees -- it's very SLR-like, since it also shows
> >> > exactly what the picture-taking lens sees. The EVF may or may not
> >> > black
> >> > out during the time that the image sensor is recording the image into
> >> > memory. Some cameras that use EVFs can send the sensor's image-data
to
> >> > the eyepiece and memory simultaneously in "movie" mode. But EVFs
> > require
> >> > power continuously when in use, not just when you're actually taking
> >> > pictures. This may result in fewer shots per battery charge; you may
> > need
> >> > to carry a spare battery or two, although that's usually a good idea
> > with
> >> > any digital camera. (For obvious reasons, film cameras don't have
> > EVFs.)
> >> >
> >> > Other compact cameras use a simple optical viewfinder that has its
own
> >> > tiny separate lens mounted near the picture-taking lens. While these
> >> > viewfinders don't drain batteries, neither do they show exactly what
> >> > the
> >> > picture-taking lens "sees". Most of them work well enough for casual
> >> > snapshooting, but they can't be as precise as a viewfinder that uses
> >> > the
> >> > actual picture-taking lens.
> >> >
> >> > The second big difference between digital SLRs and non-SLRs is that
> > every
> >> > digital SLR I've heard of uses interchangeable lenses while nearly
all
> >> > non-SLR digitals have permanently-attached lenses. If the lens that
> > comes
> >> > with your digital SLR can't quite get that particular wide-angle or
> >> > telephoto shot you want, you can remove it from the camera body and
> >> > replace it with one that's better suited to the task; you can't do
that
> >> > with a fixed lens, although some of the better digital compacts
> >> > accommodate adapter lenses that help extend the fixed lens's
> > capabilities
> >> > a bit.
> >> >
> >> > The third important difference actually has more to do with the size
> >> > and
> >> > price of the camera than anything else -- and digital SLRs are
> >> > generally
> >> > both larger and more expensive than digital compacts. As a rule,
> > digital
> >> > SLRs use physically larger image sensors than compacts; the more
> > expensive
> >> > (and usually larger) SLRs usually have larger sensors than their less
> >> > expensive kin. When everything else (including the number of pixels)
> >> > is
> >> > the same, a larger sensor means less digital noise in the captured
> > image.
> >> > This may not matter much if your primary interest is taking snapshots
> > that
> >> > won't be printed any larger than 4x6 or 5x7, but it's a very
important
> >> > consideration if you need high quality that lets you see fine detail
or
> >> > make large prints.
> >> >
> >> > No one camera has the perfect combination of features for every
> >> > photographic situation, which is why there are so many different
> >> > cameras
> >> > to choose from. It's your job to decide just which features are most
> >> > important to you, then find the camera or cameras that best fit your
> >> > requirements.
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Walter Luffman Medina, TN USA
> >> > Amateur curmudgeon, equal opportunity annoyer
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

Walter has given a good summary of the differences between SLR and non-SLR
digitals.

I would add that digital SLR's are attractive to people who already have a
large investment in Canon or Nikon compatible lenses and want to keep using
them. For many people lenses represent an investment of several thousand
dollars or more, and for them it is economically unwise, as well as
understandably painful to walk away from that sort of legacy.

Shutter lag is generally much slower for non-SLR digicams, mainly due to
focus delays. Autofocus can be almost instantaneous with an SLR because the
focus pathway uses specialized electronic optical sensors that are directly
in the optical pathway. Non SLR digicams use the CCD image for focussing,
and this is inherrently slower - still taking a second or so, for example,
even on my relatively state of the art coolpix 8700.

Personally, I've gone with non-SLR because my investment in lenses was very
small, and I value the lower price, smaller size, and dustproof lens-CCD
assembly of the non-SLR digicams. An EOS with zoom lens is larger and
heavier than my old 6x6 twin lens reflex camera!.

You'll probably be happy with whatever your choice is. There are several
good web pages comparing camera models in great detail, with discussions of
features and full-size downloadable images from each camera for comparison -
one such is www.imaging-resource.com . In the end, the satisfaction lies in
getting good results with whatever equipment you have. A few days ago I got
a reasonably good picture, handheld in low light at 1/7 second exposure,
with my coolpix's BSS feature, after a Canon EOS 20 owner refused to even
take the picture because of the slow shutter speed - and his lens probably
cost more than my camera 🙂
--

Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.dcameras (More info?)

I would also add that the shutter lag on a non-SLR can be minimized by
either pre-focusing (pressing the shutter button halfway and holding
it till your ready to shoot) or on many Digicams you have the optioon
to Manual Focus.
I use the second choice when I know I will need to get a quick picture
such as at a parade or a sporting event.
It is done by switching to manual focus, either choose your optimal
distance to your subjects, and set it.

When you take a picture this way, the camera does not have to focus,
so it is quite a bit quicker.
One thing to be aware of though is if you need to take a picture that
is closer than the distance you set, your subject may be out of focus.

On Sat, 28 May 2005 12:53:52 GMT, "Mike Russell"
<REgeigyMOVE@pacbellTHIS.net> wrote:

>Walter has given a good summary of the differences between SLR and non-SLR
>digitals.
>
>I would add that digital SLR's are attractive to people who already have a
>large investment in Canon or Nikon compatible lenses and want to keep using
>them. For many people lenses represent an investment of several thousand
>dollars or more, and for them it is economically unwise, as well as
>understandably painful to walk away from that sort of legacy.
>
>Shutter lag is generally much slower for non-SLR digicams, mainly due to
>focus delays. Autofocus can be almost instantaneous with an SLR because the
>focus pathway uses specialized electronic optical sensors that are directly
>in the optical pathway. Non SLR digicams use the CCD image for focussing,
>and this is inherrently slower - still taking a second or so, for example,
>even on my relatively state of the art coolpix 8700.
>
>Personally, I've gone with non-SLR because my investment in lenses was very
>small, and I value the lower price, smaller size, and dustproof lens-CCD
>assembly of the non-SLR digicams. An EOS with zoom lens is larger and
>heavier than my old 6x6 twin lens reflex camera!.
>
>You'll probably be happy with whatever your choice is. There are several
>good web pages comparing camera models in great detail, with discussions of
>features and full-size downloadable images from each camera for comparison -
>one such is www.imaging-resource.com . In the end, the satisfaction lies in
>getting good results with whatever equipment you have. A few days ago I got
>a reasonably good picture, handheld in low light at 1/7 second exposure,
>with my coolpix's BSS feature, after a Canon EOS 20 owner refused to even
>take the picture because of the slow shutter speed - and his lens probably
>cost more than my camera 🙂
 
I would add that digital SLR's are attractive to people who already have a
>large investment in Canon or Nikon compatible lenses and want to keep using
>them. For many people lenses represent an investment of several thousand
>dollars or more, and for them it is economically unwise, as well as
>understandably painful to walk away from that sort of legacy.
>
>Shutter lag is generally much slower for non-SLR digicams, mainly due to
>focus delays. Autofocus can be almost instantaneous with an SLR because the
>focus pathway uses specialized electronic optical sensors that are directly
>in the optical pathway. Non SLR digicams use the CCD image for focussing,
>and this is inherrently slower - still taking a second or so, for example,
>even on my relatively state of the art coolpix 8700.
>
>Personally, I've gone with non-SLR because my investment in lenses was very
>small, and I value the lower price, smaller size, and dustproof lens-CCD
>assembly of the non-SLR digicams. An EOS with zoom lens is larger and
>heavier than my old 6x6 twin lens reflex camera!.
http://www.nikond60.com
You'll probably be happy with whatever your choice is. There are several
good web pages comparing camera models in great detail, with discussions of
features and full-size downloadable images from each camera for comparison
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom