Ken, K.Takeshita wrote: > This is a very rational opinion and I have to agree with it. > Optical viewfinder is indeed a holy grail of SLR, without which it's not > even an SLR. But that was when Pentax first devised a usable SLR so many > decades ago. A lot of things happened since then, and taking example of > Canon's philosophy, it is used only for "viewfinder" in literal sense. It > is there for composition and they are apparently telling users to rely on > their AF capability. So, their viewfinder lost the original virtues. > Pentax, and to some extent Nikon, are still maintaining meaningful > viewfinders (probably because of vast number of legacy MF lenses). > I do not know if this EVF issue and the elimination of quick return mirror > are for user convenience or maker convenience (cost cutting etc). But I > wouldn't be surprised if somebody might come up with something > revolutionary. > To me, the virtue of 35mm derivatives should be the portability. Present > DSLRs with prism protrusion and large mirror box are so clumsy.
Your perspective looks logical to me (no pun intended). However, consider this. Currently all Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Pentax, etc SLR cameras force certain optical design considerations on their lenses. Notably, the flange distance that is greatly affected by the presence and the size of the mirror. Suppose that mirror will be replaced by some other solution, no matter which. It would be only reasonable then to quit maintaining optical backward compatibility. In other words, it would seem to me that SLRs of tomorrow will evolve (right term?!) to range finder cameras of today?! Boris-who-held-yesterday-Bessa-with-15/4.5-lens... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
