Talk:Digital single-lens reflex camera

message: To the unknown user 211.209.30.29 who removed the following:
::===Unusual features – infrared and ultraviolet photography===
::On July 13, 2007, FujiFilm announced the FinePix IS Pro, which uses Nikon F-mount lenses. This camera, in addition to having live preview, has the ability to record in the infrared and ultraviolet spectrums of light. (See  for a discussion of same) 
Let's understand that a number of people new to photography (especially those involved in law enforcement and forensic photography, to name a few) would certainly be interested in this reference. This is not so much a 'PR' for Fuji (as you put it in your edit) as just simply "mentioning a tool of the trade". It could be further argued about the whole page that any picture or mention of a certain manufacturer's DSLR model is also a 'promo' for that manufacturer's company, which is simply not true for this page so I stand by my reinsertion of the text. It informs readers in general of peculiar types of cameras in photography that are an answer to a particular type of photographic problem, and this is generally true in photography and with most manufacturers. Canon, for example, makes a 24mm tilt/shift lens; nobody else makes this lens including Nikon (and I wish they would). So, a mention of this lens might solve a certain kind of problem that an architectural photographer or landscape photographer might have, and that photographer would need this information. A general reader of this web-encyclopedia would also appreciate the variety of SLR and DSLR models that are out in the marketplace.--MurderWatcher1 17:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, that was user 128.84.59.234. And I agree that there's no problem with briefly mentioning particular DSLRs that have interesting characteristics.124.50.57.143 23:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reinserted Section On Fuji Infrared/Ultraviolet DSLR 

message: Added references to this section re. advantages / disadvatages. Obviously given the nature of the subject, most of these are enthusiast sites and not peer-reviewed academic journals. However, I feel they are 'Sources ... appropriate to the claims made' as per WP:V.
Any help with finding further sources is of course appreciated.219.251.88.109 02:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DSLRs compared to other digital cameras 

message: Why do I have to read the entire page AND the talk page to get a basic understanding of why DSLR cameras are used over digicams by many photographers. I come to Wikipedia to gain understanding about topics, rather than revel in scientific explanations. Sure, keep the detail but please add a sentence to the top (above the toc) which simply explains WHY the distinctions are. Something like: "DSLRs are preferred over standard digicams by many photographers due to the optical viewfinder, which shows the true image which will be captured, rather than a low-resolution LCD image of an Electronic Viewfinder (EVF)." Perhaps adding: "Most DSLRs come with the ability to equip a range of lenses, unlike most digicams, however there are some exceptions to this." - surely this is not too much to ask? Gerardtalk 16:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds good, but it would need to be verifiable... if you can cite a book or other reliable source that explains this preference, then go for it! ǝɹʎℲxoɯ (contrib) 17:05, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

text: The properties of the DSLR are common knowledge.  But inferred reasons why someone prefers them should be omitted, or sourced. Dicklyon (talk) 20:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

text: What works best is to find a source, and write what you learn from it, and cite it.  Try some of these books. Dicklyon (talk) 04:50, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early Summary 

message: The lede for this article is in dire need of a re-write.  How's this for starters:
:A digital single-lens reflex camera (digital SLR or DSLR) is a digital camera that uses an mechanical mirror system and pentaprism to direct light from the lens through an optical viewfinder on the back of the camera.
:The basic operation of a DSLR is as follows: for viewing purposes, the mirror reflects the light coming through the attached lens upwards at a 90 degree angle. It is then reflected twice by the pentaprism rectifying it for photographer's eye.   During exposure, the mirror assembly swings upward, the aperture narrows (if set smaller than wide open), and a shutter opens, allowing the lens to project light onto the image sensor.  A second shutter then covers the sensor, marking the end of exposure, and the mirror lowers while the shutter resets.  The period that the mirror is flipped up is referred to as "viewfinder blackout", with a shorter time being preferred.
:DSLRs are often preferred by professional still photographers because they allow an accurate preview of framing close to the moment of exposure, and because DSLRs allow the user to choose from a variety of interchangeable lenses.  Most DSLRs also have a function that allows accurate preview of depth of field.
:Many professionals also prefer DSLRs for their larger sensors compared to most compact digitals.  DSLRs have sensors which are generally closer in size to the traditional film formats that many professionals started out using.  These large sensors allow for similar depths of field to film, for a given focal length.
:The term DSLR generally refers to cameras that resemble 35mm format cameras, although some medium format cameras are technically DSLRs.
Micahmedia (talk) 03:54, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Lede--suggestions? 

message: The HDSLR section meanders between historical coverage ("the first HDLSR was...") and a market survey of current models.  There are merits to covering both angles, but the current article is too cluttered with impertinent trivia.  Or perhaps some of the trivia needs to be expanded upon.
For example, the Canon 5D Mark II "firmware 2.0.3/firmware 2.0.4". That's an awkward sentence. The important point is that the 5DM2 lacked broadcast-compliant video at introduction, then was later given that feature through a firmware introduction.  It's enough to simply say "firmware 2.0.4", or even leave the version out altogether, because the main point is that the feature is present/not present.  When/how the feature got added is irrelevant trivia, and it should only be included in the article if it doesn't disrupt the flow of writing.
I'm against listing individual models and their features.  wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a product guide.  And the product listings tend to get outdated very quickly (e.g. what about the Rebel 550D/T2i, and the 1D Mark IV?)  Specific models should only be listed if they are notable with respect to the topic at hand.   For me, the Nikon D90 being the first DSLR with HD movie-mode passes that 'notability test', flawed as it is.  Most of the other models do not.  They're just refinements/evolutionary-improvements along the evolution of digital cameras.  I suppose the 5D Mark 2 is notable since it's the only one with full 35mm sensor-size.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.41.58.37 (talk) 14:50, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  HDSLR section needs cleanup 

message: The word "digicam" needs to be defined.  The digicam page disambiguates to digital cameras, or digital camouflage.  Obviously the relevant article is the former, but this article includes DSLRs as well as every other kind of digital camera.  Yet, in the DSLR article (and in this very talk page) DSLRs are often compared and contrasted to digicams.  Many might assume that "digicam" means compact digital camera, but Wikipedia's articles do not make this clear at any time, and it's not an assumption that I made.  In the article, the following sentence made little sense to me:
:Therefore, many older DSLRs do not provide "live preview" (allowing focusing, framing, and depth-of-field preview using the display), a facility that is always available on digicams although today most DSLRs offer live view.
So, I'd recommend either not using the word "digicam," or defining it unambiguously.  - Random anonymous UK user on 188.220.91.30 (talk) 23:18, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of "digicam" 

message: The photo shows the two cameras lop-sided/dipping towards the center ?
203.34.154.24 (talk) 16:25, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What would that accomplish? The sensor size comparison is pretty useful and interesting. —Ben FrantzDale (talk) 16:10, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's with the Sensor-Size -Comparison picture ? 

message: A significant fact is that old fashioned 35mm SLRs almost entirely provided a fresnel lens in the viewfinder, providing a bright image. Most, or even all, DSLRs use a matte screen which is far darker and requires light adaption of the photographers eye. Can an explanation be included please, I do not know why. Reg nim (talk) 22:16, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: In SLR (not digital) viewfinder is also use to focus instead of framing, but in DSLR a Hybrid AF can take the picture in almost dark.Gsarwa (talk) 15:38, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Viewfinder

message: Aspect ratio is mentioned only two times (!) in the entire article. In my opinion, in an article which extensively talks about the "sizes" of images, sensors, and lenses; aspect ratio is one of the most important issues because of the fact that aspect ratio is the actual definitve unit of measurement in terms of rectangular images.
Especially in the "Table of sensor sizes" as well as the image captioned as "Drawing showing the relative sizes of sensors," aspect ratio should be mentioned. I suggest adding a line to Table of sensor sizes and modifying the aforementioned image to depict aspect ratios.
--98.199.22.63 (talk) 20:28, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aspect Ratio 

message: *Introduction done. 
*Moved digicam comparison and quickly merged.
*Added image in Digital_single-lens_reflex_camera#DSLR_design_principles. Related text makes educationally only really sense with this image, has to be EXPANDED by electronics/display, the "D" in SLR. Probably in the next days.
::First version done. Tagremover (talk) 12:37, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major restructering 

message: In this diff, we heard that "Compact digital cameras mostly have an even smaller image sensor, additionally providing a larger depth of field."  This is extremely misleading.  The only way a smaller sensor provides a larger depth of field is if the photo is taken with a smaller absolute aperture diameter (e.g. same f-number and smaller focal length with same field of view), and therefore gets fewer photons from the scene.  The same larger DOF can be obtained by the DSLR by stopping down to the same aperture diameter.  So I took this out.  Dicklyon (talk) 03:52, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone already updated back to saying compact give larger DoF, so I just add here in support. We should compare DoF for same picture, i.e. same FoV and same aperture, that is the only thing that makes sense? Therefore as long as the compact have a smaller sensor, therefore receiving less photons and having a shorter focal length it does have larger DoF. Obviously it is not the small sensor that give larger DoF, but the shorter lens. I hope we can agree that compacts in general have smaller sensors? We can update and make the relation ship between, smaller sensor -> shorter lens -> larger DoF more clear, if that is the issue? --Stefan talk 06:03, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  DOF 

message: While I'm at it, the lead states, "often using a larger image sensor format providing a higher dynamic range". Why does larger image sensor give higher dynamic range?? In the text there is one requested ref for the same statement and one ref  that does not talk about dynamic range at all. I think DSLR might often have better dynamic range, since they have newer sensors, and more expensive image engines but I do not think that the actual size of the sensor matters at all? Any comments? --Stefan talk 06:12, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I felt Brave and removed the claims that large sensor -> higher dynamic range, I tried to do a bit of research, and my conclusion (all OR) is that DSLRs does often have higher dynamic range, but there is not much that say that it is because of a large sensor, much more of the 'size' of the pixels. And a small compact sensor will have much smaller pixels than a DSLR, and therefore less dynamic range, but this is not directly related to sensor size. I did not update this on the page since I do not have any good sources. Please correct me and revert if I'm wrong, but please discuss here after your reverts, --Stefan talk 06:52, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dynamic range 

message: === Larger sensor sizes not directly give better image quality ===
IMHO many people still thinking that the lenses are the main subject for better quality as in film camera, but in digital camera the sensor sensitivity (not the size, because small sensor might be more sensitive than the big ones and the sensitivity is increasing in line with time, so newer sensor is better than the old ones and maybe smaller) is the first important thing. The second is the propietary processor software, if the sensor is good, but the processing is bad, the result will be bad. The third is the lens, but because it is digital, so slight quality different of the lenses will be absorb by the camera processor. In Micro four thirds system, its mount is same and the lenses can be used with camera which support m4/3 without any adapter and we can see the processor take the role more than the quality of the lens itself.
* Nikon has good quality of sensor and also the propietary processor software
* Canon has not so good quality of sensor, but its propietary processor software is good
* Sony and Pentax has better quality of sensor compare to Canon, but its propietary processor software is weak, so even the sensors quality of Sony and Pentax are better than Canon has, the image quality result are poorer than Canon result
* Olympus and Panasonic have relatively same sensor quality, but when Panasonic lens tested on Olympus gives better result than when Panasonic uses its own lens.
DxO Labs has tested more than 6,000 Combination of Camera & Lens and if we scrutinize the results, we can agree with as mention above. If to scrutinize is too hard for you, so you can pick only several lead of every brands and try to analize it. But if you doubt with the result, you are better to scrutinize all of them.
I propose to add in Larger sensor size and better image quality section as below:
=== Larger sensor sizes not directly give better image quality ===
There are several sensor producers and the sensitivity among it are different each other, so the bigger sensor is not means directly give better result. Light struck the sensor will be processed by each propietary software, so same sensor size from the same producer will give different result when processed by different software. DxO Labs has test more than 6,000 Combination of Camera & Lenses and give us the fact that even Micro Four Thirds image quality can compete with APS-C image quality. Micro Four Thirds sensor size is about 61 to 68 percent of APS-C sensor size.
Thank you so much in advance for your time to read and analyze my proposal.Gsarwa (talk) 15:27, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Larger sensor sizes not directly give better image quality 

message: There are several sensor producers and the sensitivity among it are different each other, so the bigger sensor is not means directly give better result. Light struck the sensor will be processed by each propietary software, so same sensor size from the same producer will give different result when processed by different software. DxO Labs has test more than 6,000 Combination of Camera & Lenses and give us the fact that even Micro Four Thirds image quality can compete with APS-C image quality. Micro Four Thirds sensor size is about 61 to 68 percent of APS-C sensor size.
Thank you so much in advance for your time to read and analyze my proposal.Gsarwa (talk) 15:27, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Larger sensor sizes not directly give better image quality 

message: According to my research, this was the first DSLR: http://eocamera.jemcgarvey.com/
Do they see this (in German):
* https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiegelreflexkamera#cite_note-9 (Note 9)
* http://olypedia.de/Canon_New_F-1_-_Sondermodelle_und_Modifikationen#Canon_New_F-1_.22_Electro-Optic_Camera.22_.281987.29
Rudolfo42 (talk) 20:25, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  First DSLR 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Digital single-lens reflex camera. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://camvela.com to camvela.com
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100830033236/http://presscentre.sony.eu:80/content/Detail.aspx?ReleaseID=6109&NewsAreaID=2 to http://presscentre.sony.eu/content/detail.aspx?ReleaseID=6109&NewsAreaId=2
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130528005306/http://www.businessweek.com:80/news/2011-09-08/canon-clinging-to-mirrors-means-opportunity-for-sony-cameras.html to http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-09-08/canon-clinging-to-mirrors-means-opportunity-for-sony-cameras.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080523175917/http://www.thetechlounge.com/article/308/10+Reasons+to+Buy+a+DSLR+Camera/ to http://www.thetechlounge.com/article/308/10+Reasons+to+Buy+a+DSLR+Camera/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:16, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Digital single-lens reflex camera. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.photoreview.com.au/guides/pocket-guides/digital-sorr/Choosing-a-DSLR-Camera
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/67kWgaQqv?url=http://usa.canon.com/cusa/about_canon?pageKeyCode=pressreldetail to http://usa.canon.com/cusa/about_canon?pageKeyCode=pressreldetail&docId=0901e0248055b504
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Fujifilm/fuji_ispro.asp
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://presscentre.sony.eu/content/detail.aspx?ReleaseID=6109&NewsAreaId=2
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120110030031/http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/how-kodak-invented-the-digital-camera-in-1975-364822 to http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/how-kodak-invented-the-digital-camera-in-1975-364822
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-09-08/canon-clinging-to-mirrors-means-opportunity-for-sony-cameras.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:08, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why does the DSLR need the "condenser lens" (number 6 in the first image)? I didn't find the answer in the article. --egg 08:33, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Condenser lens