On 2/24/07, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> responded to Joel in part:
> > To characterize the first iteration of a technical achievement like
> > Live View as "wrong" because it doesn't have a feature you think might
> > be nice to have seems niggardly.
> >
> A couple of things. First, live view is not new at all. Full time,
> general purpose live view on a DSLR is a great achievement that very
> much excited me when the E-330 came out, but jillions of digicams havel
> ive view.
Please. I think you understand that I am not talking about digicams.
> > What is the live view for? Is its purpose doggedly to reflect
> > in-camera settings?
> How not? To me, the ideal viewfinder, no matter what it's called, or how
> it's implemented, is one that shows me exactly what the shot will look
> like. What else would I want to see?
Thank you. I do think I understand you better. I hope you get what
you're looking for before too long.
I actually prefer having a role for imagination, which is just another
word for pre-visualization in this context. In terms of what I need,
the E-330 gives me just about everything I want. In terms of true
Live Playback, I fear an LCD image will always be a little bit
wanting. But perhaps before too long I'll look back and laugh at my
own skepticism.
Joel W.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|