All Digital Camera's SLR!?

[Jeff Canes]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[oriecat]

the reflex is the action of the mirror moving out of the way when you open the shutter.

No, reflex is the simply the use of the mirror to reflect the image to the viewfinder. There is no mirror movement in TLRs.

 

[Saeid]

Unimaxium, that was a nice explanation. Thnx for that
But u see there are people who are against digital camera's, but for the average user (not professional photographers) that use regular film camera's (non-SLR). They will get an advantage by going and picking up a digital camera, since via the LCD u will get a more TRUE shot of what u are shooting. Along with other advantages of course.

Another difference that no one mentioned about my theory on all digital camera's being SLR, was the fact that even if u get a true view of what u are about to shoot, you cant change the shutter speed or aperature of a regular digital camera. (with afew exceptions here and there)

But ya digital SLR's are pretty amazing. But they cost quite alot. Then again if u think about it, u would be investing in something that will no longer require u to buy additional film. And u can change the ISO to whatever speed u want, depending on how fast u want it.

 

[Unimaxium]

Unimaxium, that was a nice explanation. Thnx for that
But u see there are people who are against digital camera's, but for the average user (not professional photographers) that use regular film camera's (non-SLR). They will get an advantage by going and picking up a digital camera, since via the LCD u will get a more TRUE shot of what u are shooting. Along with other advantages of course.

Yes, you're right; consumer-level digital cameras do give you more of an SLR-like preview of the final image than consumer-level film cameras. But still those consumer digitals aren't technically SLRs. But for anyone other than a pro it wouldn't really make much of a difference, since they usually wouldn't care about depth of field and focusing so much considering that most cameras can do it all automatically anyway. So in my opinion, digital definitely is better for the average user.

Another difference that no one mentioned about my theory on all digital camera's being SLR, was the fact that even if u get a true view of what u are about to shoot, you cant change the shutter speed or aperature of a regular digital camera. (with afew exceptions here and there)

Well, like interchangable lenses, SLRs don't necessarily have to have manually changeable shutter speed or aperature. But, considering the different shutter mechanisms between most viewfinder cameras and SLRs, it is impossible (at least with film cameras; I'm not sure about digitals) for viewfinder cameras to have adjustable apertures, since it is essentially the aperture that acts as the shutter by being completely closed until the shutter is pressed, and then opening all the way when the shot is taken. At least I'm pretty sure that's how it works.

But ya digital SLR's are pretty amazing. But they cost quite alot. Then again if u think about it, u would be investing in something that will no longer require u to buy additional film. And u can change the ISO to whatever speed u want, depending on how fast u want it.

Yeah digital SLRs are really cool. As much as I currently love film, it still would be great to have something even low end like a digital rebel. But only as long as I didn't have to give up film. There's still something I like about having tangible film that can't get destroyed by a computer virus. Yet every time I read "D70" or "20D" my mouth starts drooling


I sure do make long posts, don't I? I never try to, but they always end up long. :roll:

 

[John Orrell]

it is impossible (at least with film cameras; I'm not sure about digitals) for viewfinder cameras to have adjustable apertures, since it is essentially the aperture that acts as the shutter by being completely closed until the shutter is pressed, and then opening all the way when the shot is taken. At least I'm pretty sure that's how it works.

The (debatably) most famous consumer 35mm viewfinder camera of all time, the Olympus Trip 35, has a separate two-speed shutter in addition to its aperture-blades. The aperture-blades can be preset to any aperture from F/2.8 to F/22 or left in automatic.

I know what you mean about the tangibility of film; I can't get my head to accept photos which only exist on a CD or memory-card as being tangible. I suppose I'll have to in time, as film gradually disappears from all but very specialist suppliers at professional (=extortianate) prices.

 

[walter23]

This is more of a semantic riddle (like "is an arm technically a leg") than a technical question. Just depends on whether you prefer to go with the common usage, or want to stretch technicalities. If the former, an SLR is a camera with a viewfinder coupled to the taking lens, with an interchangable lens system and provisions to select shutter and aperture speed. If the latter, I guess my old VHS video camera is technically an SLR and so is every digital point and shoot with an active LCD screen.