[wisent]

Let me know when you manage to use a DSLR to get results that cannot be done with a MILC.

One thing you can do with a DSLR, that you just can't do with a MILC is looking through the VF even if the camera is switched off. No extra power needed. I do that quite a lot sometimes to save energy and I just switch the camera on, when the right moment/scene/object/etc comes along. I know: it's a personal preference again, but this aspect (beneath other things) really annoys me, every time I pick up a MILC or SLT.

The whole discussion is kind of pointless in my opinion. It always comes down to personal taste. I for my part don't like EVFs and wouldn't buy any serious camera with an EVF.
Let me paint a little picture here:
I wouldn't eat pizza "Hawaii" with pineapple on it - just because I can't stand pineapple. Other people seem to like it though and that is allright. But although someone at some point had the crazy idea to put pineapple on a pizza, and a lot of people like it, you can still - up to this very day - buy pizza without pineapple...

[eurostar]

The whole discussion is kind of pointless in my opinion. It always comes down to personal taste. I for my part don't like EVFs and wouldn't buy any serious camera with an EVF.

And to the taste of camera-makers.

I really like rangefinder, and I really like digital, but I can't buy any digital rangefinder because they are too expensive for my wallet. So, let's enjoy our OVF until the day there will be just one or two way overpriced reflex cameras left on the market.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

One thing you can do with a DSLR, that you just can't do with a MILC is looking through the VF even if the camera is switched off.

The question was: what can you do *related to photography*:

Now, if I miss an application of the SLR OVF that gives it an upper hand in some way that is relevant to photography - what is that?

I doubt you can do much with the camera switched off. Saving energy is not the point - if it was, we wouldn't be using cameras with batteries.

It always comes down to personal taste.

Well, if taste is just personal, it is irrelevant when it comes to discussing market trends. No company will be influenced by your personal taste (or mine). And once you want to argue that your taste is not just personal, well, welcome back to the discussion.

[wisent]

The question was: what can you do *related to photography*:



I doubt you can do much with the camera switched off. Saving energy is not the point - if it was, we wouldn't be using cameras with batteries.

So framing a picture through the VF is not *related to photography*? Well that's indeed news to me.

And saving energy IS a point. It may not be THE point, but it is a valid point for me. Let me explain that a little: I'm mainly into nature photography. That means, I am often outside all day or even several days, without the possibility to recharge batteries. Nonetheless do I often have to look through the VF for a long time, before I can take a picture. Imagine I want to take pictures of ducks on a lake: Maybe they are sleeping with their heads tucked away, while slowly moving on the water. So I switch on my camera and follow their movements, waiting for some action. After a few minutes, the camera will go into energy saving mode (switch itself off), but I can still follow the Ducks by looking through the VF, keeping them in the frame. As soon, as some action is starting, I just half press the release button and I am ready to go. I do that kind of framing with switched off camera quite a lot so it IS *related to photography* - it's related to my personal style of photography.

And of course are personal preferences driving the market. Maybe not my single personal taste or yours, but neither are you alone with your taste, nor am I.

[IchabodCrane]

So framing a picture through the VF is not *related to photography*? Well that's indeed news to me.

And saving energy IS a point. It may not be THE point, but it is a valid point for me. Let me explain that a little: I'm mainly into nature photography. That means, I am often outside all day or even several days, without the possibility to recharge batteries. Nonetheless do I often have to look through the VF for a long time, before I can take a picture. Imagine I want to take pictures of ducks on a lake: Maybe they are sleeping with their heads tucked away, while slowly moving on the water. So I switch on my camera and follow their movements, waiting for some action. After a few minutes, the camera will go into energy saving mode (switch itself off), but I can still follow the Ducks by looking through the VF, keeping them in the frame. As soon, as some action is starting, I just half press the release button and I am ready to go. I do that kind of framing with switched off camera quite a lot so it IS *related to photography* - it's related to my personal style of photography.

And of course are personal preferences driving the market. Maybe not my single personal taste or yours, but neither are you alone with your taste, nor am I.

Certainly you must realize your need is quite unusual relative to the vast majority of people who use a camera. Maybe stated in a different way... there's nothing that prevents anyone from watching and tracking ducks without looking through a camera to do so.

[wisent]

Certainly you must realize your need is quite unusual relative to the vast majority of people who use a camera. Maybe stated in a different way... there's nothing that prevents anyone from watching and tracking ducks without looking through a camera to do so.

You are right, and I always made it clear, that I'm talking about my personal preferences here. And indeed I do spend quite a lot of time also watching and tracking ducks and other birds without a camera. But if you want to take pictures of ducks (or other animals etc.), you've got to track them somehow involving a camera. Of course one could switch of his EVF camera in between shots and just power the camera up when needed, but sometimes (not always) I prefer to follow some animals over quite some time through my VF, to be ready to shoot in the blink of an eye. With an in between shots switched off EVF camera, I would have to reframe, wich isn't always easy and takes time, if your target moved a lot between shots.

As I said in my first post in this thread: It always comes down to personal taste. I'm very aware of that. But needing power to frame a shot just is a shortcoming of the EVF compared to an OVF in my eyes.

[eurostar]

It's surely a real need, but a specialized one, just like rangefinder is for street photography. I fear that in the not so distant future just a few professional reflex cameras will allow that.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

FWIW, battery life on MILCs is not bad at all. I don't feel any difference from SLR battery life. On vacation, I shot from 10am to 2am without changing the battery - I get at least a day and a half on a charge. Perhaps people extrapolate from P&S experience? My waterproof camera does seem to run out of battery within a day, but its battery is also much smaller than that of a DSLR/MILC.

[Ash]

Laurentiu, it seems you have convinced yourself that MILC is the only way to go and are trying to convince everyone else to follow suit.
It's irrelevant whether MILCs have the same or better battery life, or if it's unnecessary to frame a photo without the camera on, or CDAF is better than PDAF.
If users are still keen on dSLRs, and not on MILCs, then there are valid reasons for this *to them*. What others consider as not important is irrelevant, and to assert this unimportance is to invalidate others' interests.

As said before, both systems have their virtues, and their customer preferences at hand. Pentax will develop the products *they* feel their customers want, and in the direction *they* want to head. It does this with their niche products to set themselves apart from what the big boys are churning out. And this is good.

[ihasa]

FWIW I own a DSLR and a MILC - because I find both have their place in my shooting and I enjoy both for different reasons.

[aurele]

Laurentiu, it seems you have convinced yourself that MILC is the only way to go and are trying to convince everyone else to follow suit.
It's irrelevant whether MILCs have the same or better battery life, or if it's unnecessary to frame a photo without the camera on, or CDAF is better than PDAF.
If users are still keen on dSLRs, and not on MILCs, then there are valid reasons for this *to them*. What others consider as not important is irrelevant, and to assert this unimportance is to invalidate others' interests.

As said before, both systems have their virtues, and their customer preferences at hand. Pentax will develop the products *they* feel their customers want, and in the direction *they* want to head. It does this with their niche products to set themselves apart from what the big boys are churning out. And this is good.

Thanks !

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

If users are still keen on dSLRs, and not on MILCs, then there are valid reasons for this *to them*. What others consider as not important is irrelevant, and to assert this unimportance is to invalidate others' interests.

Ash, I am not sure why you and others are so focused on discussing your personal interests. My interest is in discussing the photographic industry, not personal interests. There are plenty of users in the world that are still keen on rangefinders. It is a fact though that rangefinders are no longer a mainstream type of camera. Observing this does not represent a judgement on the importance of what those users consider relevant and does not "invalidate" their interests.

Can you see this difference between discussing personal preferences and discussing industry trends?

[hangman43]

Ash, I am not sure why you and others are so focused on discussing your personal interests. My interest is in discussing the photographic industry, not personal interests. There are plenty of users in the world that are still keen on rangefinders. It is a fact though that rangefinders are no longer a mainstream type of camera. Observing this does not represent a judgement on the importance of what those users consider relevant and does not "invalidate" their interests.

Can you see this difference between discussing personal preferences and discussing industry trends?

All I have seen from you is your personal interest and your personal opinion of where the camera industry is going and your personal opinion of what Pentax should be focusing on all we hear from you is about your interest and you balk at everyone else you believe you are right and everyone else is wrong. You have your Olympus it seems to fit your needs just be happy and quit trying to convince us that it is your way or Pentax will die a horrible death.

[Ash]

Can you see this difference between discussing personal preferences and discussing industry trends?

Sure, Laurentiu, but I tend to agree with others here that you've presented a fine case for MILC yourself based on your own interests, which have little to do with industry trends. The current trend is still firmly with dSLR technology for cameras, and Pentax is even more so in their future developments. MILC will be a more widely accepted format given time, but does have its limitations (at least currently). dSLRs have limitations that are tolerable for the vast majority of photographers and I don't see MILCs replacing dSLR for some time yet.

[Kunzite]

Agreed with the last 2 post; sorry, Laurentiu, but you're not discussing industry trends; you're pushing hard your personal choice on a SLR company and a SLR user base, and declare our personal choices as being "pointless".

Industry trends are discussed using data, not preferences; and I don't see you doing that. Are the DSLR no longer mainstream, or in immediate danger of becoming so? Nope, they're a market 4 times larger than MILCs. Is the DSLR market shrinking rapidly? Nope, it's growing. There is no immediate danger for Pentax to continue in this market, IMHO. The data is publicly available here (for Japanese manufacturers):
CIPA:Digital Cameras