I am afraid you are right. I can understand that price drives sales
and that price competition has made small cameras unprofitable, but
is the lowest common denominator the only one being catered to? I
would gladly give up a color LCD replacing it with a small black and
white that would just give me data and a histogram if I had a decent
viewfinder. I would even pay a little more. What I don't get is that
there are predictions of $400 DSLRs by next year and they can't make
and sell a decently featured small cam for the same price.
I mention Nikon because I know about it, but since they have dropped
all the upper line Coolpix models and only make little
viewfinderless, cheap purse cameras they are turning a decent profit
on them for the first time in a long time. Nothing like the little
cams that lured many of us to our first digital experience are being
made any more. A shame really.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Jul 31, 2006, at 2:28 PM, Bill Pearce wrote:
>
> Pardon me for being the cynic, but I think we are but a year away from
> having no cameras with viewfinders, other than SLR's. In defence of
> the
> manufacturers, when was the last time we saw anyone actually using
> one? When
> was the last time one was made that represented the area recorded?
>
> It probably adds a fair amount to the bottom line!
>
> Bill Pearce
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|