Originally posted by gbeaton Your second paragraph is what I was getting at. I'm suggesting a built-in OVF - with adjustable FOV based on focal length. Not SLR, nor an add-on.
My first digital camera was a Canon powershot that had these features in a tiny palm sized camera, so its definitely doable.
I have been an avid supporter of putting an EVF on every mirror-less camera; maybe younger people can handle the LCD outdoors, but I cannot (I am almost 67), and Sony has demonstrated that an EVF can be constructed that is barely distinguishable from an OVF. I don't see much point to an OVF, because there is no way of anticipating all lenses that might be used,
and to me, a primary use of a viewfinder would be to help me in seeing what I am doing when I am trying to manually focus a legacy lens, which means that I need to see what the camera actually sees.
---------- Post added 11-11-14 at 01:26 PM ----------
Originally posted by kadajawi Simple. Pentax is limited to the Milbeaut. Sony makes the processor for themselves, and Samsung too (and the fastest processor is from Samsung). Doubt they'll offer it to Pentax, and even then it might not be trivial to adapt to it.
I think now, or soon, is the time to get serious with mirrorless, in order to get some dedicated lenses into place.
At this point Pentax needs to put
some kind of viewfinder on the Q; the viewfinder Canon uses is not very good, but it makes the SX-50 and SX-60 usable. What Pentax needs to do is to get back into the game, so that people will actually think of them when discussing questions such as "What Mirrorless Camera Should I Use for Birding?"; there really was a thread like that at another site - I suggested a Pentax Q ... and my suggestion was totally ignored. That is not good.