Pickett Wilson
Veteran
As I pointed out in the other thread, your external finder is 3:2 and the digi Pen will likely be 4:3.
Micro 4/3rds Pen leak
- Thread starter Harry Lime
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 123
- Views 13K
.ken
I like pictures
If you look at the newer Oly SLR's such as E-620... you can now switch between various formats 4:3 - 3:2 etc...
gavinlg
Veteran
Seriously. Please get over the viewfinder. It's been said like 100 times already. Using the LCD is just as good as using a viewfinder - just a different way of doing it. They physically can't put a viewfinder on this camera because of its physical constraints like NOT HAVING A MIRROR which is why they are able to put the massive sensor in it whilst keeping it so tiny.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
And no one could make a 4:3 finder ...
JonasYip
Well-known
Several posts have indicated "not having a mirror" as a reason for not having a viewfinder which is rather odd, especially on *Rangefinder* forum. Last I checked many of my cameras are mirrorless yet manage to have a viewfinder ;-)
That said, it doesn't bother me that this new Olympus does not have one.
j
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Someone could make a 4:3 finder, of course. A multi-focal EVF with superimposed frame lines. 🙂
JonasYip
Well-known
you know, we haven't seen what's under that plastic hotshoe cover... perhaps there's a row of connectors there for things like a hotshoe mounted EVF.
bmattock
Veteran
An F1 racecar is good enough for an F1 racecar driver, but then I am not an F1 racecar driver, so an F1 racecar is not suitable for me. I don't care if every Magnum photographer who ever lived stands up and dances in a conga line across my field of vision singing the praises of the GRD in five-part harmony, I don't want one. What kind of weak-willed sister subordinates their own will to what other people like?
Rick Waldroup
Well-known
Geez, Bill, I now have this image of Magnum photographers dancing in a conga line forever fused into my brain. Thanks a lot....:bang::bang::bang:
bmattock
Veteran
Just one of the many services I provide.
Avotius
Some guy
Sorry you are the one that is way off, I have not mentioned digi CL once before and have been trying to get people to understand this m 4/3 concept is not the cheap digital rangefinder they hope for because every other post is about "does it have a viewfinder?"
gavinlg
Veteran
So considering this is a camera that is going to have lens coverage from 14mm to 600mm as well as zoom lenses, how do you propose they make an optical viewfinder NOT based on the mirror/pentaprism method that can variably cover and frame focal lengths that are infinitely variable between 14mm-600mm? The only way is EVF, and the only way to apply that is with a hotshoe clip on EVF finder in a camera this small, but a)you'll probably find that's patented by ricoh and b) it's clumsy and not really any better than an actual LCD screen.
Avotius
Some guy
I think we got to give it up Gavin, let them boil about their missing viewfinder, I'm going out to go take pictures, got a 5 roll a day habit going on and think we can better spend our time doing somehong more productive. Geez can you imagine what this thing would cost on top of the rumored 1000 dollar price if they put in the optical viewfinder everyone wants with the range of the lenses for this system? A finder that covers at least 14-400mm given the current offerings would be huge and impressivly expensive!
Last edited:
Traut
Well-known
Check out the Contax G1 and G2. They did it for primes and zoom.
back alley
IMAGES
not alot of really good conga dancers around anymore.
the idea of the oly being so tiny is appealing only when thinking about very small lenses, like that 17/2.8...to me anyway.
i think the g1 is near perfect with the kit lens (except for speed) but with the tiny 20/1.7 i might think i have died and gone to heaven.
(heaven, btw, does not allow dslrs in)
😉
the idea of the oly being so tiny is appealing only when thinking about very small lenses, like that 17/2.8...to me anyway.
i think the g1 is near perfect with the kit lens (except for speed) but with the tiny 20/1.7 i might think i have died and gone to heaven.
(heaven, btw, does not allow dslrs in)
😉
gavinlg
Veteran
Yeah I think I'm going to leave it now - I've been trying for the last 4-5 pages of the other thread, but no matter how much logic and sense my post makes people just keep spouting the same narrow minded stuff about the viewfinder. It ain't about the viewfinder!
Last edited:
bmattock
Veteran
It is if that's what you want. And that's what I want. You can say it isn't all you like, but I know what I want, and I want an optical viewfinder.
Avotius
Some guy
then go buy a M8 or RD1, this is not the optical viewfinder camera you think it is and no amount of wanting will make it that way.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
They COULD raise the body height a half an inch and include a viewfinder if they chose to (ala the Canon G10, Panasonic G1). Anyway, thee is absolutely NO way I'd pay $1000 for a camera without one. I'm not exactly clear about what it is about having a viewfinder, but I've had them for 40-some years and I'm not much interested in giving them up. Even a EVF would be better than nothing!
infrequent
Well-known
ummm....auxiliary finders anyone?
you guys probably want in-camera stabilisation, sensor dust cleaning, weather proof casing and extremely high ISO performance for less than $1000 bucks too.
you guys probably want in-camera stabilisation, sensor dust cleaning, weather proof casing and extremely high ISO performance for less than $1000 bucks too.
Similar threads
- Article
