Originally posted by wiyum My assumption has grown to being that at least as many people want a rangefinder as use rangefinders. They're extremely inviting yet prohibitively expensive.
I am sure you are right. There are several appealing things about Leica and similar rangefinders.
- compact size
- near silent operation
- build quality
- image quality
- shoot from the hip usage
- floating viewfinder framing
1. Could be addressed by Pentax by reducing size of DSLR. There are limits because of the registration distance etc., but earlier digital models were much smaller. And I believe they could be smaller still. Miniaturise the battery, even if battery life is reduced somewhat. Get rid of extra knobs and switches. Streamline the control interface.
2. Requires removing mirror as in the Micro 4/3 design.
3. Make it a metal body. And black. With no/few protrusions.
4. We have this already with stellar Pentax lenses.
5. This comes from continuous usage with the same prime lens which develops the photographer's ability to frame a scene without the viewfinder.
6. The large viewfinder combined with the method of focusing allows you to use a rangefinder with both eyes open. This is not going to be duplicated on an SLR. However, what about a future mini-Pentax which removes the viewfinder and top LCD in place of a live view image on a screen that can be tilted? No reasonnot to if the mirror is gone.
One could then hold the camera at waist height and look down to compose. Nifty, huh?
For those who object that focusing would be difficult without a viewfinder, I answer that this is just one of the compromises rangefinder users already live with. This is an alternative camera that I doubt you'd use to do macros.