On Sun, 25 May 2003 12:46:33 +0200, philip@pch.home.cs.vu.nl (Philip Homburg) wrote:

>In article <3ecf6fb6.4140793@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>,

>Neuman - Ruether <d_ruether@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>[...] ...but there is no reason an

>>interchangeable-lens SLR with electronic imaging cannot

>>be made (video cameras have operated this way for

>>years...;-).

>I've no idea how an EVF is supposed to work in low-light situations. For

>video cameras it is no problem, they don't provide multi-second exposures

>anyway.

They often can go to 1/4 second, and with motion, this

does make focusing harder, since the refresh rate is low...

>Personally, I find focusing a video camera much harder than a decent

>(manual focus) SLR.

Often true, unless you have one of the better video-camera

finders. These can be used to focus wide-angles fairly

easily (and the Sony 707 can double the eyepiece LCD image

magnification when the focus ring is moved...

>If you rely completely on the AF system, you can use an EVF for framing,

>but what's the point.

Having something a lot better than an unshielded tiny rear

LCD screen for judging exposure and color-balance, as I

pointed out in the parts of the post that you removed.

This has reduced my failure rate with this camera to close

to zero, since I have a good preview of the image as I take

it, and just after (for checking framing, exposure, and

WB...). If you rely on the AF system, what's the point of

using an optical VF system...? ;-)