I think then the viewfinder on a photocamera is very different from a camcorder's. The former is merely a rough reminder what the picture will look like, the latter is, for me, an absolute neccesity because to me it's like watching TV, be it small, by which I can very well judge the resulting shoot.
Still, the folding screen allows for the camera to be held high above your head, to get over crowds, and get an idea of the picture. You know the newsreporters just clicking ahead with their highheld cameras. It'll turn out pretty right anyway. :-) Paul Delcour > From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 07:04:45 -0600 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Viewfinder > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 09:04:47 -0400 > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Delcour" > Subject: Viewfinder > > >> Been thinking about viewfinders. On my camcorder I can fold out my >> viewfinder, ie the LCD screen, giving me much more freedom of position > than >> with my photocamera. Why do digital cameras not have such a folding LCD >> screen? Or do some have them? For this reason alone I've grown to love > video >> more than photography. > > Some of the better digital point and shoots for sure have folding screens. > My Canon G1 has just such a thing, for example. The problems with them is > they are battery hogs, and really only good for rough composition. > > William Robb >
